4 ms·

The recent criticism against the F35 was started by Adam Smith, Democratic Representative from Washington state, where Boeing has a huge presence and is a big d

by zozin 6y ago

The recent criticism against the F35 was started by Adam Smith, Democratic Representative from Washington state, where Boeing has a huge presence and is a big donor. The chief of staff of the Air Force referred to the F35 as a Ferrari that you don't want to drive all the time. To me that reads that you can't use/waste the F35 in non-peer enemy conflicts since it's far too good of a plane for such situations, and that Congress should pony up more money to the armed forces so they can build a modern but less capable plane.

jjk166 6y ago
That's not a compliment. The F22 was supposed to be the Ferrari you don't want to drive all the time, and the F35 was supposed to be the inexpensive, less capable plane you use against non-peer enemies. In asking for funds to develop a new plane to fill that role, there is an implicit admission that the F-35 has failed to fill that role for which it was designed.
- decafninja 6y ago
  Now there is rumors of the "F-36 Kingsnake" circulating about a sort of cheap "F-16++" fighter being needed. The F-15EX's existence is also kind of an admission that the F-22/F-35 combo didn't quite meet desired expectations too.
  - nradov 6y ago
    The F-22 pretty much met expectations, however the operating costs are high (as expected) and the production line was shut down so it's impossible to build more. Meanwhile the old F-15s used for missions like homeland defense are literally falling apart so some sort of replacement was mandatory. The F-15 production line is still active so that became the only practical option.
    - decafninja 6y ago
      From a capability perspective, the F-22 seems clearly superior to its predecessor the F-15, so definitely successful there. But wasn't the original goal to eventually wholesale replace the F-15 (the air superiority variants at least)? That clearly isn't going to happen. Much like how the F-35 was supposed to replace the F-16 and F/A-18, but seems like that's not going to happen the way things are going.
      - nradov 6y ago
        The program which produced the F-22 started back in 1981 and the original intent was to wholesale replace the F-15. But it got caught in a procurement death spiral of escalating unit costs which caused repeated quantity reductions. Eventually the Obama administration cancelled all future purchases in 2011 in order to save money for the F-35 program and the wars in the Middle East. At this point it's effectively impossible to restart F-22 production as the supply chain for critical components has disappeared.
spicybbq 6y ago
That was certainly an interesting thing for him to say. My read is that the maintenance requirements of stealth aircraft are unavoidably high.
- bopbeepboop 6y ago
  Both can be true. It’s a plane reserved for near-peer conflicts where the high performance and stealth are critical deciders due to unavoidably high costs of those technologies. So the military would also like to have lower cost, cheaper to operate planes for other missions — eg, support ground troops in low threat areas.

by zozin 6y ago

jjk166 6y ago

That's not a compliment. The F22 was supposed to be the Ferrari you don't want to drive all the time, and the F35 was supposed to be the inexpensive, less capable plane you use against non-peer enemies. In asking for funds to develop a new plane to fill that role, there is an implicit admission that the F-35 has failed to fill that role for which it was designed.

decafninja 6y ago
Now there is rumors of the "F-36 Kingsnake" circulating about a sort of cheap "F-16++" fighter being needed. The F-15EX's existence is also kind of an admission that the F-22/F-35 combo didn't quite meet desired expectations too.
- nradov 6y ago
  The F-22 pretty much met expectations, however the operating costs are high (as expected) and the production line was shut down so it's impossible to build more. Meanwhile the old F-15s used for missions like homeland defense are literally falling apart so some sort of replacement was mandatory. The F-15 production line is still active so that became the only practical option.
  - decafninja 6y ago
    From a capability perspective, the F-22 seems clearly superior to its predecessor the F-15, so definitely successful there. But wasn't the original goal to eventually wholesale replace the F-15 (the air superiority variants at least)? That clearly isn't going to happen. Much like how the F-35 was supposed to replace the F-16 and F/A-18, but seems like that's not going to happen the way things are going.
    - nradov 6y ago
      The program which produced the F-22 started back in 1981 and the original intent was to wholesale replace the F-15. But it got caught in a procurement death spiral of escalating unit costs which caused repeated quantity reductions. Eventually the Obama administration cancelled all future purchases in 2011 in order to save money for the F-35 program and the wars in the Middle East. At this point it's effectively impossible to restart F-22 production as the supply chain for critical components has disappeared.

spicybbq 6y ago

That was certainly an interesting thing for him to say. My read is that the maintenance requirements of stealth aircraft are unavoidably high.

bopbeepboop 6y ago
Both can be true. It’s a plane reserved for near-peer conflicts where the high performance and stealth are critical deciders due to unavoidably high costs of those technologies. So the military would also like to have lower cost, cheaper to operate planes for other missions — eg, support ground troops in low threat areas.