Is F-35 really a mess ? If so, why ?

>Its new and cool so therefore it doesnt matter if its way over budget and has major delays!

Yes,its a really good plane, but they still fucked up majorly in a) planning or b) development.

>a military program is over budget
Wow stop the fucking presses.

Is this just a daily thread at this point? When are you butthurt fags going to give it up?

Attached: f35 bingo.jpg (1154x1020, 435K)

Yeah, if internet defense "journalists" were around during the development cycles of earlier fighters like the F-15 and 16, we'd still be hearing about how shitty they are to this day.

This is really on a new scale tho.

you're a fucking idiot, simple as.

Is it, though? People keep referencing the $1.5 trillion number without realizing that's the projected program cost by 2070.

In what way? Delays and cost overruns happens for a reson user.

delays and cost overrun don't constitute a failure.

i'm still waiting for all these other r&d projects that you're so keyed into... where are they? do you actually have no argument? oh wait...

Yes

Attached: images.jpg (293x172, 14K)

To be fair, the F-35 has definitely had some budgetary issues over the course of its development. However, people have a tendency to catastrophise every problem experienced by the aircraft for some reason.

The program was bumpy.
Still has a few issues, namely the maintenance and logistics software which is dogshit.
Otherwise, it' fine.

>delays and cost overrun don't constitute a failure.

No, and I never stated that it did either. Try reading the posts you reply to.

you are a disingenuous hackjob retard.

>Look at all my fancy words I will write instead of actually reading the posts I reply to!

>hey guys! why is the f-35 such a failure!
>haha just look at all the other US r&d projects xD, no i won't name any!
>haha just look at all the cost overrun and delays!
>haha no, i'm not saying it's a failure, look at the cost overruns and delays, that means something though right!?
kill yourself, and do it unironically, you fucking faggot.

>>hey guys! why is the f-35 such a failure!
Never stated that
>>haha just look at all the other US r&d projects xD, no i won't name any!
Not even me who wrote that
>>haha just look at all the cost overrun and delays!
Yes, they exist, please look at them
>>haha no, i'm not saying it's a failure, look at the cost overruns and delays, that means something though right!
Now you are getting it.
>kill yourself, and do it unironically, you fucking faggot.
You first straightoid.

>Yes, they exist, please look at them
as has already been posted, cost overrun + delays does not equal a failure or anywhere even close to that. if you weren't so busy stuffing cocks down your throat you would be capable of recognizing that every single military project that has attempted to bring weapons technology ahead an entire generation is going to have those things.

so no, it doesn't mean anything. retard.

The only differences between the F-35 program and previous aircraft is the scope of it, the fact that its actually fairly transparent, and the ability of journalists to spread information more easily than ever before (legitimate or otherwise). As a program its fine.

>as has already been posted, cost overrun + delays does not equal a failure or anywhere even close to that

Now, wich again, is exactly my point, but you seem to be unable to grasp that.

Also, if every single new project gets delays and massive cost overruns, you should probably start to realize that this is something you have to plan for, instead of just trolling taxpayers by saying that "lol it will surely be fine this time!"

This. If these dumb zoomer vatniks and the internet were around during F-16 or just about any other US procurement program back in the day it'd be the same shitposting.

Hate to be that one faggot. but f-35s are basically on par with f-16s at this point. Newer radars will have a drop of 100 noise level sensitivity to track lower RCS targets. Good against shit tier middle east countries until they eventually get supplied the good shit.

The number of missions performed is not a measure of airframe suitability for a given task. Without more inforamtion we have no idea why the F-16 performed more CAS. It could be that we had more F-16's on hand. It could have been that the F-16 pilots needed more airtime than others. There are a zillion other factors affecting that data, therefore its useless for your argument.

>we are talking about airplanes and even still you have not named anything

I thought a military aviation expert such as yourself was intimately familiar with the designs of Clarence Kelly, or did you skip right past that for some dumbass reason?

i NEVER understood why the USAF still has the F15C to this day. As you can see it even costs more money than the F15E and other than i think i heard somewhere droping external fuel tanks the E can do ANYTHING the C can do and others that it cant.

limited stealth
technical specs and software already stolen by the chinese
no supercruise
top speed makes it much slower than most 4th gen aircraft at 1.6 mach officially
maintenance nightmare
overbudget
overpriced
constant delays
limited fuel capacity
limited range
external stores need to be stealthy
standard external stores destroy stealth

burden of proof is on you, start naming these air frames that bridged as much of a gap as the f-35 has and give some points about how they were cheaper + less problems + no cost overruns + no delays... oh wait, you will not name anything. stop replying to me until you actually have something to back up your claim.

>limited stealth
Compared to what?
>technical specs and software already stolen by the chinese
Probably yes
>no supercruise
Correct
>top speed makes it much slower than most 4th gen aircraft at 1.6 mach officially
Wich doesnt matter, since you never travel at tyose speeds anyway
>maintenance nightmare
Might be
>overbudget
Yes
>overpriced
Not really
>constant delays
No
>limited fuel capacity
Compared to what? Its on par with all single engined jets
>limited range
See above
>external stores need to be stealthy
No
>standard external stores destroy stealth
No. An F-35 carrying regular external stores will still be far stealthier then any 4th gen can even dream about.

Spreyposting should be banable.

P-38 Lightning
U-2
SR-71

honestly, most planes built between the 1950's through the 1970's were on time and on budget.

I really don't like how slow and underpowered the thing is or how highly its wings are loaded. The only thing going for it is its electronics suite.

>>jack-of-all-trades = master of none, is better than master of just one.

Buster Glosson's book goes into detail about why certain planes hit certain targets. Basically they thought the A-10 would have a harder time surviving in that environment.

it's a massive piece of shit. also, slavshit.

Attached: 1531442381631.png (1600x1600, 309K)

It's because we have a shit ton of them, and a number of pilots who have the training necessary to operate them. The F-22 was meant to replace them, but with the Cold War ending and the US having no peer to compete with in the air meant that there was no reason to procure a replacement any time soon. With China rapidly catching up, you can expect the USAF to buy way more of their 6th gen fighter.

That's the thing. The F15E already does the same air to air shti the Eagle does but with added air to ground and i think some recon?

Would it be too hard to upgrade every F15C to F15E?

As easy as replacing them with F-15Xs until the 6th gens come around

>Would it be too hard to upgrade every F15C to F15E?
Probably, yeah. I'm not sure if you could really make the structural changes necessary to put the 2nd seat in, along with the extra support for munitions on the wings. On top of that, the F-15E doesn't really add any extra A2A capabilities, and the US is passing most of the A2G role onto the F-35s once the F-15Es eventually hit end of life.

It doesn't have to be good, just better than everything else. Like this piece of shit for example.

Attached: 1224495.jpg (1020x649, 45K)

Aint going to waste my time to write an answer to this picture, straight from the archive:
A little list of stuff that is fishy on a short glimpse in this picture alone >Yak uses dedicated vertical thrust jets not a lift fan
Obvious difference hence why they lie about it.
>work of Petr Ufimstev was deem to be useless for soviets and so it was allowed to be puplish publicly
American making stuff work russians could not.
>the picture of the YAK-43 is according to wikipedia from a site for vector graphics that is offline, great source
On top of that every vantik like you would have shitted all over me for using something from wikipedia, while almost all the text on the picture is from there.
>there is no source at all for the YAK-43 using s-ducts
Inb4 "but YAK-40 and YAK-42 had them". Yeah they had them but they are fucking civilian airliners and entire different planes

Wrong
codeonemagazine.com/article.html?item_id=137
>A great deal of misinformation has appeared on the Internet regarding the relationship of the Soviet Yak-41 (later Yak-141), NATO reporting name Freestyle, to the X-35 and the rest of the JSF program. The Pratt & Whitney 3BSD nozzle design predates the Russian work. In fact the 3BSD was tested with a real engine almost twenty years before the first flight of the Yak.
>Throughout the 1970s and 1980s, the Soviet Navy wanted a supersonic STOVL fighter to operate from its ski jump equipped carriers. At what point the Yakovlev Design Bureau became aware of the multi-swivel nozzle design is not known, but the Soyuz engine company created its own variant of it. The Yak-41 version of the nozzle, from published pictures, appears to be a three-bearing swivel duct with a significant offset “kink.” The Yak-141 also used two RKBM RD-41 lift engines – an almost identical arrangement to the Convair Model 200 design. The aircraft was also re-labeled as a Yak-141 to imply a production version, but no order for follow-on series came from the Russian Navy.
>Yakovlev was looking for money to keep its VTOL program alive, not having received any orders for a production version of the Yak-141. Lockheed provided a small amount of funding in return for obtaining performance data and limited design data on the Yak-141. US government personnel were allowed to examine the aircraft. However, the 3BSN design was already in place on the X-35 before these visits.

>Kevin Renshaw served as the ASTOVL Chief Engineer for General Dynamics and was later the deputy to Lockheed ASTOVL Chief Engineer Rick Rezabek in 1994 when the 3BSD concept was incorporated into the X-35B design. Renshaw continues to work in the Advanced System Development branch of Skunk Works where he is currently working on flight demonstration of the DARPA ARES VTOL UAV program.

>he thinks it won't double before then

ohoho

Well, given the current unit cost reductions, I doubt it will. There were a number of overruns during the initial production phase, but most of it seems to be running smoothly by now. The C model may need some more work, but the F-35As are proving themselves to be a very effective platform. Meanwhile, foreign sales are continuing to subsidize the R&D investment that Lockheed put into the program.

>Meanwhile, foreign sales are continuing to subsidize the R&D investment that Lockheed put into the program.

I thought basically all of the foreign partners had pulled out at this point except for, what, Israel, Japan, and Britain?

Who else is buying these?

>I thought basically all of the foreign partners had pulled out at this point
Nope. Turkey was kicked out, but otherwise, things are on track.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II#Operators

The Japanese are even purchasing more F-35Bs to equip their "helicopter" carriers. On top of that, both Switzerland and Canada may end up purchasing F-35s, as the aircraft is cheaper and more capable than most of the platforms they're looking at.

>stealth developed by ruskis
lmao what

Also, finally, a reason to post this.

Attached: f35 fuckin with us.jpg (652x960, 109K)

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II_procurement#Potential_exports
Here's a list of potential export bids that are being considered on top of the current countries. I doubt we'll see India or the UAE operating F-35s anytime soon, but the Poles and Spaniards will almost certainly end up buying some.

thanks for the info planebro

>japs equipping helo carriers with these

Imagine the panick that will spread amongst boomers and jap pacifists once they find out.

If cost overruns and delays does not constitue failures why are you bringing them up in a thread about the supposed failure of the f35?
The only reason to bring it up would be to imply that these points makes the plane a failure.

Not the guy you were originally talking with.

I think the biggest pushback will be from the Chinese more than anything.

What nakes you say they're on par with f-16s?

This.

As if $1.5 trillion isn't bad enough.
Also, that's a 50 year estimate, not the actual final cost

Being on time and on budget was the norm back then, failures got fired basically on the spot. What's eerie about modern liberal economy is that repeatedly failing and requiring a second chance, mounting costs and pushing back the deadline is considered acceptable or even normal.

I brought them up to point out that despite the programme beeing a mess that has had its fair share of delays and cost overruns, its still a very good plane.

Hey guys , dont argue about the trash F-35 it is just yak141 s idea and solution of easy VTOL Tech. But did u ever spoke to a pilot of F-35 out if record? They are tellin , there is too much to one crew member, it is not a fighter class plane and it do not need to be compared to shitty F-16 , this pláne is mainly used for attacker purposes and multirole bomber. Compare SU-35 to F-35 or SU-57 , might u did not even know theese planes exists. And yes I think the F-35 is a mess . With this money they I should build a foken autonomous multipurpose drone plane to avoid the looses of worthy pilots.

You might as well say that the F-35 is a modern version of the P47. They are """"Fighters""""" but they are only best than everyone in bombing. They just have some of the most advanced avionics even with A2A. The plane wasn't designed as a superirority fighter.

You forgot : A powerful political tool to ensure US "allies" like Canada and some european countries keep their hands shackled after buying this jet, just like they did with the previous US made fighters like the F-16 or the F-18, and make sure they stay in line with the US foreign policy. And of course spend wisely their tax money to LM, which is a plus.
Take the canadian example. Even if Trudeau said no to the F-35 at first, they'll end up buying this fucking jet even if it's not operationnal yet. It's how awesome it is.

Attached: supersonic tank.jpg (400x300, 71K)

>These posts were written by soavic hands on an old worn out keyboard in St Petersburg

Attached: 520.jpg (150x200, 16K)

Paid in cabbages.

Are we boomerposting on Jow Forums now?

Which means the F-35 is still better as it still has a shorter detection range than non-stealth.

>pláne

First confirmed sighting of Russian phoneposter.

>poles having more gen5 planes than Moscow
>poles having an actual stealth aircraft

Nuclear sharing when?

It means the F-35 is good enough for low intensity conflicts but in case of WW3 it would be another story.

If newer radars can track lower RCS targets (they can't by the way), the F35 would STILL have the same effectiveness relative to an F16 of other traditional fighter aircraft.

Could be a Frenchman
Fucking de Gaulle

>1.6 mach officially

Hahaha, seriously? This is embarrassing. Might as well take out the cockpit and make it a drone, because it'll only be good for bullying shitty countries that can't maintain a real airforce.

>Could be a Frenchman
Pierre Sprey IS a French-sounding name...

Attached: GoAwaySprey.png (1236x888, 288K)

The french language uses the à, not á. It's a pain in the ass to write that one down on any french keyboard.

>gotta go fast
I'm sure you can explain the fantastic advantages it would gain if it could fly to mach 2 instead of 1.6 in combat configuration.

with inflation for 2070

Off the top of my head: interception, time to and from target, evasion of threats, even greater difficulty for enemy planes to get a missile lock

>limited stealth

First or second stealthiest manned fighter in the world today

>technical specs and software already stolen by the chinese

Which cannot be utilized against the F35 since the breach was discovered and cannot be used by the Chinese since they lack the technology for true LO aircraft and by the time they are capable of using the data, it will mostly be obsolete.

>no supercruise

True

>top speed makes it much slower than most 4th gen aircraft at 1.6 mach

Slightly slower since top speeds of 4.5gens are measured naked and loaded for combat they are made slower than an F35 due to internal weapons bay

>maintenance nightmare

Not really

>overbudget
>overpriced

Like $80m per and dropping. Cheaper than Rafale, Eurofighter, etc. and superior in every way that matters

>constant delays

There were like 4 total and the last one was years ago

>limited fuel capacity

More than any of the aircraft it's replacing

>limited range

More than any of the aircraft it's replacing

>external stores need to be stealthy standard external stores destroy stealth

>Muh stealth is an on/off switch meme

With external stores it's still stealthier than any aircraft in Russia's arsenal.

>I'm sure you can explain the fantastic advantages it would gain if it could fly to mach 2 instead of 1.6 in combat configuration.
More range at the same efficiency

Russians stole tech from Convair 200.

>Might as well take out the cockpit and make it a drone
Sadly until the drone input lag is fixed drones will have to be flought like if they were bombers. or passanger aircrafts

>input lag
>implying air combat drones won't be AI operated and simply take high-level objective commands from manned operators
The future is now, old man.

Attached: XQ-58A_Valkyrie_demonstrator_first_flight.jpg (1486x987, 65K)

If the technology isn't quite LITERALLY active then there's no point making shit for it.I dont doubt that that will be the case, but making a plane for AI before the AI is ready makes for an useless plane.

It would still be detectable at a lower range than other aircraft.

I detect belkan witchcraft. Prepare yourself, traitor.

fpbp

Disregarding asshurt Vatniks and Chicom shills; what is the status of the F35 and the Ford class of carriers? I had heard that there was some level of IOC delay out until 2021 but I am unsure why.

Flying faster normally reduces the fuel efficiency and the range.

Good-enough for mass combat air AI was possible 20 years ago. The AF has been dragging their feet forever, such that they're only investigating now that uni kids can write pilot-beating software.

Given that it failed to meet it's goals of parts commonality across all platforms and now only has 20-25% parts in common I'd call it a lesson learned. You cannot design a plane like this as each branch has its own operational requirements.

The Ford's had some teething issues to say the least, but things seem to be progressing fine, and I don't see any reason to believe that the Ford class will be any less successful than the Nimitz once the kinks are worked out.

The Military Contractor had parts made in around 40 states to ensure that there would be 80 senators defending the project. Its also why the parts all fit poorly together now.

The MIC isn't dumb man they've been doing this to the American people for 75 years.

That's the case with nearly every major procurement program. It's the only way to keep the retards in congress from playing engineer and forcing companies to restart development on various projects.

That I don't doubt, the Ford is a clear progression in the initial designs of CVNs and Nimitz Class, what with its smaller tower, superior flight deck arrangement, and lower crew requirements. But the F35 is specifically a laggard in carrier operations with the Ford which I don't understand, why will they deploy the Ford class with F18s rather than F35s?