F35 - superfighter or lame duck?

[Daryl Hunt]

Good job Bleipriester, you fell for some idiotic propaganda like you always do. The full press release (not the cherry picked one you're drooling over) by Israel is detailed more here: Israeli lawmakers: F-35 get is fine, but must ‘meticulously assess’ follow-on buys


TEL AVIV, Israel — Parliamentary findings released Monday on long-term planning within the Israeli military validated the nation’s need for 50 F-35 Adir fighter jets, yet urged a comprehensive review of alternatives — including drones and “other sources of precision fire” — before a government decision to purchase another 25 to 50 aircraft, as requested by the Israeli Air Force. “The Adir is not just another platform, but brings new capabilities to the battlefield due to its stealth,” members of a parliamentary subcommittee found following a two-year review of the Israel Defense Forces‘ multiyear organization and spending plan. In a section devoted to the Air Force, lawmakers noted that the F-35, “with all the existing limitations and against anti-aircraft missiles projected in the future, returns the Israel Air Force, through proper planning and with the recognition of its vulnerability points, to a capability for ‘stand-in’ operations.”


I also love the part about F-35 being non-airworthy. 100k flight hours without a crash (unprecedented), IOC declared, utter domination in exercises, active squadrons deployed overseas, and full combat capability being installed this month... what kind of moron would decided that is a plane that isn't airworthy?

You need to read the article before you determine whether it is propaganda or not. Apparently, everything but approved sources is propaganda.

If the F-35 is that fantastic why does the Department of Defense think it may never be combat ready?

F-35 pilot disputes leaked DoD memo that claims the F-35 may never be combat ready

DOT-amp-E-AF-IOC-Memo
Dated August 9th, 2016. Long before the 3F mod was being finished or installed. You need to be aware of the date and read the whole thing. This was 6 months before the A model went IOC. Most of the problems have nothing to do with it dropping or firing anything internal. Yes, the Gun isn't right under 2B or 3I but it's been long known that it wouldn't be totally operational until 3F. The Gun isn't real important. If the F-35 is having to use it's gun in combat then the pilot has completely screwed the pooch.

Look at the dates then get me one that is not a year and a half old.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

It´s the opinion of the DoD. I think the DoD is not happy with that flying cost factor.

The DoD is a big organization, and you are confusing the opinion of Gilmore with the entire entity. The pilots and people close to the program might have other opinions.

Either way the passing of time has already proven the opinion you're leaning on as false. F-35 has been turning in dominant performances and is getting full combat config this month.

All existing planes perform better in their roles at lower costs. The A-10 is the most low cost plane that still performs well. Even if the F-35 will be combat ready one day, it´s a big failure.

This is just asinine.

If F-15 performs it's role as a fighter better why are they on the receiving end of high kill rations via F-35? You aren't making much sense.

F-16 is a better fighter/bomber? F-35 has longer legs, better sensors, can fly stealthy, etc. they aren't even close. What exactly does the F-16 do better than F-35? An F-16 matching capabilities of F-35 would need external tanks, ECM pod, targeting

AV-8B is a better attack plane? A subsonic short range jet with a much smaller payload, far inferior SA, and inability to function as an air superiority fighter is better than the F-35?

F-18 is better? F-35C has longer range, can perform missions requiring stealth configuration, has a bigger payload in non-stealth configuration, doesn't need targeting pod, ECM pod, external fuel to match capabilities, etc. there isn't a single thing F-18 does better.

The F-15E is the missile truck today. I posted where it is better on one type of mission than either the F-22 or the F-35 and that is interdiction where you are showing your manly parts instead of just firing. Not something you want to use either the F-22 or the F-35 for.

You are right on the F-16. When you load it out to the same loadout as the F-35A carrying internals only then you will be lucky to even reach much over Mach 1 and your G rating will be around 6 or less. In order to enter combat, the F-16 has to drop it's tanks and a few more things to get it up to it's potential. And you still have to have enough gas to get home without the externals. By the time you get it ready to fight, you are limited to about 4 missiles, not extra gas, no bombs. But loaded the F-16 out like a F-35A, you are limited to a flying brick.

Now, about the AV-8B. When comparing it to the F-35B, it's like comparing a fish flopping in a bucket to a properly prepared Sushi. (I really hate Sushi). The survivability of the AV-8B against anything other than something out of the 50s is suicidal. The F-35B can do everything the AV-8B can do and do it better, safer, faster and more. And it will kill fewer pilots other than the enemies.

Now let's take a look at the F-18. The F-18E/F are carrier birds. I just love it when someone compares the F-18 to a SU-30. The SU-30 is a land based fighter. When you convert the SU-30 to a carrier based bird it becomes the SU-33. The best Carrier bird is the F-18 hands down. Right now, the Navy is using Marine F-35Bs to do some pretty fantastic stuff they have never been able to do before. The F-35B enables the Naval Missiles an extra 200 miles. You can only shoot as far as you can see and that is about 200 miles. Now, part that F-35B at the 200 mile mark and you just gained about 200 miles or more. Instead of only going as far as your ship can see, you can now go until your missile either bags the target or runs out of fuel. Not something you really want to use any version of the F-18 (including the G) for. While the G has some pretty neat toys on board, the F-35B has almost all the toys internal and can defend itself against air to air encounters. The G is a dead duck against many of the Russian and Chinese fighters. Once the F-18G is discovered it can't run or fight. With the 3F upgrades, the F-35B will be able to take over all F-18Gs functions. But you have to understand that some of the F-35Bs are still running the version 2 mods and having even been upgraded to even the 3I. Even so, it's so much better than the F-18 right now that even the B model is more lethal.

 

[Bleipriester]

I read your source, and posted the entire set of information that your source cherry picked from while intentionally leaving out details so they could stamp on a misleading headline and confuse low-information readers like you. That is propaganda.

When we have all the information we see that Israel wasn't doubting the F-35 like you claim in your post, it is recommending an evaluation of whether the plan to purchase additional fighter jets is wise versus other options such as drones or artillery.

If the source is wrong about something, there is no need to accuse it of propaganda. AMN is accurately reporting. Sources, that exclude Syrian army news are the propaganda sources in reality as the SAA is strongest and most busy war party during each day of this war. And after all the Syrian war is about Syria, right?

Your posted that it wasn't air-worthy because of development version of the plane had deficiencies, which was not the case. Clearly it is air worthy, since anyone can see them flying thousands of hours in the plane.

Regarding deficiencies, it was an "if" scenario, where if things aren't fixed it may never be combat ready. Yet here we are about to see 3F released where shortcomings (like the gun) are indeed operational and tested.

The plane is air-worthy, it takes an moron of epic proportions to claim otherwise.

If that is this clear, there would be no controversy. Just look at the Eurofighter for another apparent failure.

 

[Bleipriester]

Good job Bleipriester, you fell for some idiotic propaganda like you always do. The full press release (not the cherry picked one you're drooling over) by Israel is detailed more here: Israeli lawmakers: F-35 get is fine, but must ‘meticulously assess’ follow-on buys


TEL AVIV, Israel — Parliamentary findings released Monday on long-term planning within the Israeli military validated the nation’s need for 50 F-35 Adir fighter jets, yet urged a comprehensive review of alternatives — including drones and “other sources of precision fire” — before a government decision to purchase another 25 to 50 aircraft, as requested by the Israeli Air Force. “The Adir is not just another platform, but brings new capabilities to the battlefield due to its stealth,” members of a parliamentary subcommittee found following a two-year review of the Israel Defense Forces‘ multiyear organization and spending plan. In a section devoted to the Air Force, lawmakers noted that the F-35, “with all the existing limitations and against anti-aircraft missiles projected in the future, returns the Israel Air Force, through proper planning and with the recognition of its vulnerability points, to a capability for ‘stand-in’ operations.”


I also love the part about F-35 being non-airworthy. 100k flight hours without a crash (unprecedented), IOC declared, utter domination in exercises, active squadrons deployed overseas, and full combat capability being installed this month... what kind of moron would decided that is a plane that isn't airworthy?

You need to read the article before you determine whether it is propaganda or not. Apparently, everything but approved sources is propaganda.

If the F-35 is that fantastic why does the Department of Defense think it may never be combat ready?

F-35 pilot disputes leaked DoD memo that claims the F-35 may never be combat ready

I read the article. It's crap. But reading another of your "LEt's sink the Porgram" cites, 3i is an interim modification where there are 15 unresolved problems that are all addressed in the 3F and 4 mods either scheduled or being done right now.

Evenw ith thos4e 15 problems not addressed, it's still one bad MF and head and shoulders above everything else for ground attack and second to only to the F-22 for air to air. You can't change that, now can you. Fighter Jocks love the bird and wouldn't trade it for any other bird but each and every one of them must be in error, right?

It´s the opinion of the DoD. I think the DoD is not happy with that flying cost factor. All existing planes perform better in their roles at lower costs. The A-10 is the most low cost plane that still performs well. Even if the F-35 will be combat ready one day, it´s a big failure.

What has a better operating cost? The F-16 and the A-10. That's it. What has a better tonnage operating cost than the F-35A? Just the F-16 and not by a large margin. Last year, the F-35A has gotten to just above the F-16 in operating costs. I have already posted the link and graphics to back that up. Where are YOUR links and where do they say that you are correct. The only ones show either a political slant or some idiot that hasn't sat in an F-35As seat EVER. We have shown links from the pilots that rave on how great the bird is even with it's problems. Of course, almost all the other birds only wished they had those problems.

The F-35A costs 10-12000 USD more per hour and your get three F-16 for one F-35A. It is also not a secret that the F-35 is the most expensive military project in history. You actually don´t have the cash.

 

[DrainBamage]

If the source is wrong about something, there is no need to accuse it of propaganda. AMN is accurately reporting.

Proof is in the pudding, they intentionally left out information in order to provide a false headline. That is not accurately reporting, and their source was press releases from Israel about the need to study alternatives to using fighter aircraft in the future.

If that is this clear, there would be no controversy. Just look at the Eurofighter for another apparent failure.

Actually no. There have been controversies about every aircraft, by your simpleton logic none of them are airworthy.

By the way, Eurofighter is air-worthy as well.

 

[DrainBamage]

The F-35A costs 10-12000 USD more per hour and your get three F-16 for one F-35A.

You're either a compulsive liar or quite uninformed. An F-35A costs under 100 million dollars, and estimates for F-16s for India (one of the latest proposals to purchase) were closer to 80 million. 3 to 1? It's math, you should try it.

It is also not a secret that the F-35 is the most expensive military project in history. You actually don´t have the cash.

It sure is, and I'm not sure why that is considered something bad about the program. They are buying thousands of 5th gen fighters to replace aging A-10s, AV8Bs, F-15s, F-16s, and F-18s. I'd expect it to be the most expensive military project in history, especially since with dollar inflation there should always be new projects that are the most expensive in history.

Funny you sure turned tail and ran away from your comment that existing fighters it is replacing are better in their roles. Sucks to be called out on the bullshit you're shoveling doesn't it?

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Good job Bleipriester, you fell for some idiotic propaganda like you always do. The full press release (not the cherry picked one you're drooling over) by Israel is detailed more here: Israeli lawmakers: F-35 get is fine, but must ‘meticulously assess’ follow-on buys


TEL AVIV, Israel — Parliamentary findings released Monday on long-term planning within the Israeli military validated the nation’s need for 50 F-35 Adir fighter jets, yet urged a comprehensive review of alternatives — including drones and “other sources of precision fire” — before a government decision to purchase another 25 to 50 aircraft, as requested by the Israeli Air Force. “The Adir is not just another platform, but brings new capabilities to the battlefield due to its stealth,” members of a parliamentary subcommittee found following a two-year review of the Israel Defense Forces‘ multiyear organization and spending plan. In a section devoted to the Air Force, lawmakers noted that the F-35, “with all the existing limitations and against anti-aircraft missiles projected in the future, returns the Israel Air Force, through proper planning and with the recognition of its vulnerability points, to a capability for ‘stand-in’ operations.”


I also love the part about F-35 being non-airworthy. 100k flight hours without a crash (unprecedented), IOC declared, utter domination in exercises, active squadrons deployed overseas, and full combat capability being installed this month... what kind of moron would decided that is a plane that isn't airworthy?

You need to read the article before you determine whether it is propaganda or not. Apparently, everything but approved sources is propaganda.

If the F-35 is that fantastic why does the Department of Defense think it may never be combat ready?

F-35 pilot disputes leaked DoD memo that claims the F-35 may never be combat ready

I read the article. It's crap. But reading another of your "LEt's sink the Porgram" cites, 3i is an interim modification where there are 15 unresolved problems that are all addressed in the 3F and 4 mods either scheduled or being done right now.

Evenw ith thos4e 15 problems not addressed, it's still one bad MF and head and shoulders above everything else for ground attack and second to only to the F-22 for air to air. You can't change that, now can you. Fighter Jocks love the bird and wouldn't trade it for any other bird but each and every one of them must be in error, right?

It´s the opinion of the DoD. I think the DoD is not happy with that flying cost factor. All existing planes perform better in their roles at lower costs. The A-10 is the most low cost plane that still performs well. Even if the F-35 will be combat ready one day, it´s a big failure.

What has a better operating cost? The F-16 and the A-10. That's it. What has a better tonnage operating cost than the F-35A? Just the F-16 and not by a large margin. Last year, the F-35A has gotten to just above the F-16 in operating costs. I have already posted the link and graphics to back that up. Where are YOUR links and where do they say that you are correct. The only ones show either a political slant or some idiot that hasn't sat in an F-35As seat EVER. We have shown links from the pilots that rave on how great the bird is even with it's problems. Of course, almost all the other birds only wished they had those problems.

The F-35A costs 10-12000 USD more per hour and your get three F-16 for one F-35A. It is also not a secret that the F-35 is the most expensive military project in history. You actually don´t have the cash.

And you know this for a fact. Well, cupcake, facts are based on facts. So where are your facts. I already gave a nice link and graphics to prove your wrong.

 

[Bleipriester]

If the source is wrong about something, there is no need to accuse it of propaganda. AMN is accurately reporting.

Proof is in the pudding, they intentionally left out information in order to provide a false headline. That is not accurately reporting, and their source was press releases from Israel about the need to study alternatives to using fighter aircraft in the future.

If that is this clear, there would be no controversy. Just look at the Eurofighter for another apparent failure.

Actually no. There have been controversies about every aircraft, by your simpleton logic none of them are airworthy.

By the way, Eurofighter is air-worthy as well.

The headline is correct. Eurofighters can break apart, may not use their guns and may not go further than 20 minutes from their airbase. There is a reason no Eurofighters were used in Libya and Syria: They are crap.

 

[Bleipriester]

The F-35A costs 10-12000 USD more per hour and your get three F-16 for one F-35A.

You're either a compulsive liar or quite uninformed. An F-35A costs under 100 million dollars, and estimates for F-16s for India (one of the latest proposals to purchase) were closer to 80 million. 3 to 1? It's math, you should try it.

It is also not a secret that the F-35 is the most expensive military project in history. You actually don´t have the cash.

It sure is, and I'm not sure why that is considered something bad about the program. They are buying thousands of 5th gen fighters to replace aging A-10s, AV8Bs, F-15s, F-16s, and F-18s. I'd expect it to be the most expensive military project in history, especially since with dollar inflation there should always be new projects that are the most expensive in history.

Funny you sure turned tail and ran away from your comment that existing fighters it is replacing are better in their roles. Sucks to be called out on the bullshit you're shoveling doesn't it?

Prices here:
Modern Day Military Pricing List

 

[Daryl Hunt]

The F-35A costs 10-12000 USD more per hour and your get three F-16 for one F-35A.

You're either a compulsive liar or quite uninformed. An F-35A costs under 100 million dollars, and estimates for F-16s for India (one of the latest proposals to purchase) were closer to 80 million. 3 to 1? It's math, you should try it.

It is also not a secret that the F-35 is the most expensive military project in history. You actually don´t have the cash.

It sure is, and I'm not sure why that is considered something bad about the program. They are buying thousands of 5th gen fighters to replace aging A-10s, AV8Bs, F-15s, F-16s, and F-18s. I'd expect it to be the most expensive military project in history, especially since with dollar inflation there should always be new projects that are the most expensive in history.

Funny you sure turned tail and ran away from your comment that existing fighters it is replacing are better in their roles. Sucks to be called out on the bullshit you're shoveling doesn't it?

Prices here:
Modern Day Military Pricing List

The last buch of F-35As cost 110 mil per copy including engines. Your price list in error. I corrected the F-35 to show "Error". Anyone can edit that page. I suspect you may have done so as well.

 

[DrainBamage]

The headline is correct.

The headline is wrong, it only seems correct to naive people who don't know any better and are too lazy to verify it with additional sources. Like you.

Eurofighters can break apart, may not use their guns and may not go further than 20 minutes from their airbase. There is a reason no Eurofighters were used in Libya and Syria: They are crap.

Any plane "can" break apart, that doesn't make it not air-worthy. If a plane can safely fly (and Eurofighter has thousands of hours spanning decades) it is air worthy. They ferry Eurofighters to Saudi Arabia, I'm sure you had a fun geography class where that was 20 minutes from Europe.

Again by your definition no plane is airworthy, which is incredibly stupid even coming from you. When your source says F-35 isn't air-worthy it just proves it is stupid, as is anyone who believes it. A plane that has 100k hours with zero crashes, including flights across Atlantic and Pacific, is air-worthy.

 

[Bleipriester]

The F-35A costs 10-12000 USD more per hour and your get three F-16 for one F-35A.

You're either a compulsive liar or quite uninformed. An F-35A costs under 100 million dollars, and estimates for F-16s for India (one of the latest proposals to purchase) were closer to 80 million. 3 to 1? It's math, you should try it.

It is also not a secret that the F-35 is the most expensive military project in history. You actually don´t have the cash.

It sure is, and I'm not sure why that is considered something bad about the program. They are buying thousands of 5th gen fighters to replace aging A-10s, AV8Bs, F-15s, F-16s, and F-18s. I'd expect it to be the most expensive military project in history, especially since with dollar inflation there should always be new projects that are the most expensive in history.

Funny you sure turned tail and ran away from your comment that existing fighters it is replacing are better in their roles. Sucks to be called out on the bullshit you're shoveling doesn't it?

Prices here:
Modern Day Military Pricing List

The last buch of F-35As cost 110 mil per copy including engines. Your price list in error. I corrected the F-35 to show "Error". Anyone can edit that page. I suspect you may have done so as well.

Sad, those accusations. What would I gain from that?

 

[Daryl Hunt]

The F-35A costs 10-12000 USD more per hour and your get three F-16 for one F-35A.

You're either a compulsive liar or quite uninformed. An F-35A costs under 100 million dollars, and estimates for F-16s for India (one of the latest proposals to purchase) were closer to 80 million. 3 to 1? It's math, you should try it.

It is also not a secret that the F-35 is the most expensive military project in history. You actually don´t have the cash.

It sure is, and I'm not sure why that is considered something bad about the program. They are buying thousands of 5th gen fighters to replace aging A-10s, AV8Bs, F-15s, F-16s, and F-18s. I'd expect it to be the most expensive military project in history, especially since with dollar inflation there should always be new projects that are the most expensive in history.

Funny you sure turned tail and ran away from your comment that existing fighters it is replacing are better in their roles. Sucks to be called out on the bullshit you're shoveling doesn't it?

Prices here:
Modern Day Military Pricing List

The last buch of F-35As cost 110 mil per copy including engines. Your price list in error. I corrected the F-35 to show "Error". Anyone can edit that page. I suspect you may have done so as well.

Sad, those accusations. What would I gain from that?

If you are going to lie about one thing then you will lie about others. You are Guilty as charged or a very gullible person. Either way, it diminishes your opinion to others.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

The F-35A costs 10-12000 USD more per hour and your get three F-16 for one F-35A.

You're either a compulsive liar or quite uninformed. An F-35A costs under 100 million dollars, and estimates for F-16s for India (one of the latest proposals to purchase) were closer to 80 million. 3 to 1? It's math, you should try it.

It is also not a secret that the F-35 is the most expensive military project in history. You actually don´t have the cash.

It sure is, and I'm not sure why that is considered something bad about the program. They are buying thousands of 5th gen fighters to replace aging A-10s, AV8Bs, F-15s, F-16s, and F-18s. I'd expect it to be the most expensive military project in history, especially since with dollar inflation there should always be new projects that are the most expensive in history.

Funny you sure turned tail and ran away from your comment that existing fighters it is replacing are better in their roles. Sucks to be called out on the bullshit you're shoveling doesn't it?

Prices here:
Modern Day Military Pricing List

The last buch of F-35As cost 110 mil per copy including engines. Your price list in error. I corrected the F-35 to show "Error". Anyone can edit that page. I suspect you may have done so as well.

Sad, those accusations. What would I gain from that?

The list is actually quite accurate since it was done in 2009 and hasn't been updated since. For the F-35, this is just an estimate and was about right for 2009. But when it went into production that price came down considerably.

Once again, check the date of publication before you make another damned fool of yourself.

 

[DrainBamage]

Every thread Bleipriester has popped up in he has made an utter fool of himself, it isn't going to change.

He even fell for that fake Iran stealth fighter picture where they towed that toy around.

 

[HenryBHough]

From what I'm hearing from pilots the F-35 IS a great plane to fly when it's not grounded or restricted in some way. Rare occasions but really great.....at times......

It's availability rate is similar to most other fighter jets, and is already much better than F-18.


F-35 by the Numbers

F-35 program manager Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan said the jet is doing well, logging availability of about 56 percent, mission capable rates of 66 percent, and mission effectiveness rates of 79-80 percent. “Maturity is getting better,” he said. “We are above the growth curves” predicted, he said, asserting that a mission capable (MC) rate of 60 percent is “pretty good” for a jet still in development. USAF’s goal at maturity for a jet is an MC rate of 80 percent, but USAF has been turning in MC rates in the 50-60 percent range for mature jets due to reduced readiness funding in recent years


Air Combat Commander Bullish On F-35 IOC

A key factor in Carlisle’s assessment was clearly the recent engagement at Mountain Home Air Force Base, where seven F-35As and 160 personnel from Hill AFB deployed for two weeks in the first half of June. The aircraft flew all 88 planned sorties. In target practice, they dropped 16 GBU-39 bombs and one missed. But that was a problem with the bomb, Carlisle noted, and not with the aircraft. Altogether, 39 of 40 weapons hit their targets for a 97.5 percent hit rate. And the aircraft boasted a “really, really exceptional” 92.3 mission capable rate. “It gives me a lot of confidence when I start thinking about IOC when as a capstone deployment that’s what happens,” Carlisle said.

Oh, OK....."mission capable rates of 66 percent,"

I guess that would be acceptable to a person whose car refused to start 44% of the time and he/she had to walk to work nearly half the year.....about two days per week.....

 

[Daryl Hunt]

From what I'm hearing from pilots the F-35 IS a great plane to fly when it's not grounded or restricted in some way. Rare occasions but really great.....at times......

It's availability rate is similar to most other fighter jets, and is already much better than F-18.


F-35 by the Numbers

F-35 program manager Lt. Gen. Christopher Bogdan said the jet is doing well, logging availability of about 56 percent, mission capable rates of 66 percent, and mission effectiveness rates of 79-80 percent. “Maturity is getting better,” he said. “We are above the growth curves” predicted, he said, asserting that a mission capable (MC) rate of 60 percent is “pretty good” for a jet still in development. USAF’s goal at maturity for a jet is an MC rate of 80 percent, but USAF has been turning in MC rates in the 50-60 percent range for mature jets due to reduced readiness funding in recent years


Air Combat Commander Bullish On F-35 IOC

A key factor in Carlisle’s assessment was clearly the recent engagement at Mountain Home Air Force Base, where seven F-35As and 160 personnel from Hill AFB deployed for two weeks in the first half of June. The aircraft flew all 88 planned sorties. In target practice, they dropped 16 GBU-39 bombs and one missed. But that was a problem with the bomb, Carlisle noted, and not with the aircraft. Altogether, 39 of 40 weapons hit their targets for a 97.5 percent hit rate. And the aircraft boasted a “really, really exceptional” 92.3 mission capable rate. “It gives me a lot of confidence when I start thinking about IOC when as a capstone deployment that’s what happens,” Carlisle said.

Oh, OK....."mission capable rates of 66 percent,"

I guess that would be acceptable to a person whose car refused to start 44% of the time and he/she had to walk to work nearly half the year.....about two days per week.....

An Aircraft is a different animal. Try taking your car out to the middle of Death Valley with only enough drinking water to stay in a working car but not enough to hike out without it. and expect it to work every time. If it doesn't, you die. You will have second thoughts about entering Death Valley with your car.

If an Aircraft needs to pull over for repairs, there isn't a pull off lane and there isn't any AAA that can help them. 66% is actually not bad. During the last Red Flag, they were getting 95% sortie generation. But under normal use, it might be 66% which isn't a bad thing. When we got our brand new F-15A models, we had a sortie generation of 33% and that was the best for the entire AF. Then the mods started rolling in and we got it up to about 66% until the C model was introduced and all our As were upgraded to the C specs. It went up to about 70%.

I believe the A-10 sortie rate would be also 70%. Not so bad. Not great but not so bad either. The F-35A is a new system and only misses by 4%. When the A-10 was fairly new and had all the mods available to it done, it was nothing to hear about a 90%+ sortie rate. But today, it's down to 70% and is just going to get worse. Meanwhile, the F-35A is going to get better. It's already acceptable by military fighter stands for sortie rate.

What next, you and yours going to ding the F-35A because it doesn't have an ash tray and cigarette lighter on board?

 

[DrainBamage]

Winter: Speed up Lot 11 JSF deal
WASHINGTON — The F-35 joint program office is aiming to cement a contract agreement with Lockheed Martin for the 11th batch of joint strike fighters by the end of the year. But the new head of the program office, Vice Adm. Mat Winter, wants to get it done even faster, telling reporters on Sept. 6, “I’m pressurizing the team for 15 October.” The JPO has finalized its proposal, which will decrease the price of an F-35A conventional takeoff and landing model to less than the $94.6 million per unit price in the lot 10 deal, he said after a speech at the Defense News Conference.

 

[Bleipriester]

The F-35A costs 10-12000 USD more per hour and your get three F-16 for one F-35A.

You're either a compulsive liar or quite uninformed. An F-35A costs under 100 million dollars, and estimates for F-16s for India (one of the latest proposals to purchase) were closer to 80 million. 3 to 1? It's math, you should try it.

It is also not a secret that the F-35 is the most expensive military project in history. You actually don´t have the cash.

It sure is, and I'm not sure why that is considered something bad about the program. They are buying thousands of 5th gen fighters to replace aging A-10s, AV8Bs, F-15s, F-16s, and F-18s. I'd expect it to be the most expensive military project in history, especially since with dollar inflation there should always be new projects that are the most expensive in history.

Funny you sure turned tail and ran away from your comment that existing fighters it is replacing are better in their roles. Sucks to be called out on the bullshit you're shoveling doesn't it?

Prices here:
Modern Day Military Pricing List

The last buch of F-35As cost 110 mil per copy including engines. Your price list in error. I corrected the F-35 to show "Error". Anyone can edit that page. I suspect you may have done so as well.

Sad, those accusations. What would I gain from that?

If you are going to lie about one thing then you will lie about others. You are Guilty as charged or a very gullible person. Either way, it diminishes your opinion to others.

So when I lied before?

 

[Daryl Hunt]

You're either a compulsive liar or quite uninformed. An F-35A costs under 100 million dollars, and estimates for F-16s for India (one of the latest proposals to purchase) were closer to 80 million. 3 to 1? It's math, you should try it.

It sure is, and I'm not sure why that is considered something bad about the program. They are buying thousands of 5th gen fighters to replace aging A-10s, AV8Bs, F-15s, F-16s, and F-18s. I'd expect it to be the most expensive military project in history, especially since with dollar inflation there should always be new projects that are the most expensive in history.

Funny you sure turned tail and ran away from your comment that existing fighters it is replacing are better in their roles. Sucks to be called out on the bullshit you're shoveling doesn't it?

Prices here:
Modern Day Military Pricing List

The last buch of F-35As cost 110 mil per copy including engines. Your price list in error. I corrected the F-35 to show "Error". Anyone can edit that page. I suspect you may have done so as well.

Sad, those accusations. What would I gain from that?

If you are going to lie about one thing then you will lie about others. You are Guilty as charged or a very gullible person. Either way, it diminishes your opinion to others.

So when I lied before?

Wow, the OJ defense. It's too late for your "Innocent" routine. I don't have to list where you have lied. Your post speech for themselves.