4 ms·

If F-35 is such a failure, how come many countries have chosen to buy it? Consulting this next page, I count 8 countries besides the US that have taken delivery

If F-35 is such a failure, how come many countries have chosen to buy it? Consulting this next page, I count 8 countries besides the US that have taken delivery of F-35s, plus many that have ordered it, but not yet taken delivery: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II#Operators https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning... The UK for example currently has a fleet of 32, and Australia has 50.

karaterobot 3y ago
I'm not taking a side on this particular issue, but there are many reasons a person or a country might buy something that wasn't very good, even if they knew it wasn't. Maintaining a relationship with the vendor (aka a foreign nation with whom you maintain diplomatic/economic relations) is a big one.
morkalork 3y ago
It's both until its not. If only 1 or 2 countries signed up, it'd be an expensive failure. If everyone signs up, cost go down and economies of scale make it a wild success.
- actionfromafar 3y ago
  Yeah, F35 turned into something I would never have anticipated: it's actually not that expensive anymore.
Kuinox 3y ago
Because they are buying USA weapons, not the weapons that fits what their country needs. https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/politics/fighter-jet-purchase--worrying--but-legal--says-swiss-audit-body/47889476 https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/politics/fighter-jet-purchase--...
throw0101c 3y ago
> If F-35 is such a failure, how come many countries have chosen to buy it? What's the alternative? How many other models can be purchased at all? Canada went through a bunch of drama to find a replacement for the legacy F/A-18s, and the main options were: Eurofighter Typhoon, Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, F-35, and the Saab Gripen. * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II_Canadian_procurement#2019 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning... Gripen wasn't in the same league, so we basically have the Typhoon and SuperHornet as other options, and both were at least a decade older with regards to their 'base' design (though there have been further upgrades). So if you're going to be stuck with a plane for 20+ years, you might as well pick the newest model year. Personally I'd be happy with the Super Hornets (and thrown in some Growlers) for Canada given "6G" fighters are starting to be designed—basically skipping the "5G" F-35—but Boeing were a bunch of dumbasses when the decision was being made: * https://www.cnbc.com/2017/09/18/justin-trudeau-says-canada-will-not-buy-from-boeing-while-it-is-busy-trying-to-sue-us.html https://www.cnbc.com/2017/09/18/justin-trudeau-says-canada-w...
- eevilspock 3y ago
  > Personally I'd be happy with... There's a lot of armchair quarterbacking in these comments, this one taking the cake.
  - 23B1 3y ago
    HN weighing in on military stuff is always comedy to those of us who've been in the military. It's nobody's fault – this stuff can be baroque in its complexity – but it does make for some entertaining reading!
    - simmerup 3y ago
      HN weighing in on anything outside of tech is comedy
      - lukev 3y ago
        Also tech, a good portion of the time.
        debo_ 3y ago
        Management is the most comedic topic of all, but it borders on tragedy.
        civilitty 3y ago
        This thread is the HN equivalent of Dale Gribble laughing at those sheeple.
    - throwaway2037 3y ago
      Finance / economics is the same here. Medicine can be hit or miss. Sometimes medical researchers show up and do surprise.
  - throw0101c 3y ago
pydry 3y ago
Because it cost $2 trillion and it's so so. Mostly becausr it cost $2 trillion. $2 trillion is a fair chunk of cash. Allies buying American hardware isnt necessarily a sign of quality, also. America puts pressure on them to buy its hardware.
- mannerheim 3y ago
  Turkey seems awfully broken up about not being allowed to buy the F-35.
  - pydry 3y ago
    Turkey had a choice between S400s from Russia and F-35s and they chose the S400. Theyve since doubled down on that choice. Realistically it was probably the better choice. The US MIC was probably more cut up about it than Turkey which is probably why this stunt was pulled: https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2020/06/29/us-could-buy-turkeys-russia-made-s-400-under-senate-proposal/ https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2020/06/29/us-could-buy...
    - vGPU 3y ago
      Even if it was come to a war situation where they had to trade off 10 s-400’s for a single f-35, they’d still be significantly ahead financially from what I remember.
    - mannerheim 3y ago
      Russian air defence has had a rather poor showing lately, so perhaps not.
      - throwawaymaths 3y ago
        I think that's a skill issue. Ukrainians are operating similar equipment with better success. Much like how India and China seem to have no problems operating the sister ships of the kuznetsov
jowea 3y ago
There's a bit of a problem because even if it's a (partial) failure as far as project management goes, competition is so low that if you're a US-aligned state and want a 5th generation fighter, the F-35 is still the only reasonable option. In general, even if something is awful as product and its development was a disaster, if it's monopoly on something important it is still going to sell.
Bayart 3y ago
> If F-35 is such a failure, how come many countries have chosen to buy it? The F-35's "killer feature" is non other than the US nuclear umbrella.

karaterobot 3y ago

I'm not taking a side on this particular issue, but there are many reasons a person or a country might buy something that wasn't very good, even if they knew it wasn't. Maintaining a relationship with the vendor (aka a foreign nation with whom you maintain diplomatic/economic relations) is a big one.

morkalork 3y ago

It's both until its not. If only 1 or 2 countries signed up, it'd be an expensive failure. If everyone signs up, cost go down and economies of scale make it a wild success.

actionfromafar 3y ago
Yeah, F35 turned into something I would never have anticipated: it's actually not that expensive anymore.

Kuinox 3y ago

Because they are buying USA weapons, not the weapons that fits what their country needs. https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/politics/fighter-jet-purchase--worrying--but-legal--says-swiss-audit-body/47889476 https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/politics/fighter-jet-purchase--...

throw0101c 3y ago

> If F-35 is such a failure, how come many countries have chosen to buy it? What's the alternative? How many other models can be purchased at all? Canada went through a bunch of drama to find a replacement for the legacy F/A-18s, and the main options were: Eurofighter Typhoon, Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, F-35, and the Saab Gripen. * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II_Canadian_procurement#2019 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning... Gripen wasn't in the same league, so we basically have the Typhoon and SuperHornet as other options, and both were at least a decade older with regards to their 'base' design (though there have been further upgrades). So if you're going to be stuck with a plane for 20+ years, you might as well pick the newest model year. Personally I'd be happy with the Super Hornets (and thrown in some Growlers) for Canada given "6G" fighters are starting to be designed—basically skipping the "5G" F-35—but Boeing were a bunch of dumbasses when the decision was being made: * https://www.cnbc.com/2017/09/18/justin-trudeau-says-canada-will-not-buy-from-boeing-while-it-is-busy-trying-to-sue-us.html https://www.cnbc.com/2017/09/18/justin-trudeau-says-canada-w...

eevilspock 3y ago
> Personally I'd be happy with... There's a lot of armchair quarterbacking in these comments, this one taking the cake.
- 23B1 3y ago
  HN weighing in on military stuff is always comedy to those of us who've been in the military. It's nobody's fault – this stuff can be baroque in its complexity – but it does make for some entertaining reading!
  - simmerup 3y ago
    HN weighing in on anything outside of tech is comedy
    - lukev 3y ago
      Also tech, a good portion of the time.
      - debo_ 3y ago
        Management is the most comedic topic of all, but it borders on tragedy.
        civilitty 3y ago
        This thread is the HN equivalent of Dale Gribble laughing at those sheeple.
  - throwaway2037 3y ago
    Finance / economics is the same here. Medicine can be hit or miss. Sometimes medical researchers show up and do surprise.
- throw0101c 3y ago

pydry 3y ago

Because it cost $2 trillion and it's so so. Mostly becausr it cost $2 trillion. $2 trillion is a fair chunk of cash. Allies buying American hardware isnt necessarily a sign of quality, also. America puts pressure on them to buy its hardware.

mannerheim 3y ago
Turkey seems awfully broken up about not being allowed to buy the F-35.
- pydry 3y ago
  Turkey had a choice between S400s from Russia and F-35s and they chose the S400. Theyve since doubled down on that choice. Realistically it was probably the better choice. The US MIC was probably more cut up about it than Turkey which is probably why this stunt was pulled: https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2020/06/29/us-could-buy-turkeys-russia-made-s-400-under-senate-proposal/ https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2020/06/29/us-could-buy...
  - vGPU 3y ago
    Even if it was come to a war situation where they had to trade off 10 s-400’s for a single f-35, they’d still be significantly ahead financially from what I remember.
  - mannerheim 3y ago
    Russian air defence has had a rather poor showing lately, so perhaps not.
    - throwawaymaths 3y ago
      I think that's a skill issue. Ukrainians are operating similar equipment with better success. Much like how India and China seem to have no problems operating the sister ships of the kuznetsov

jowea 3y ago

There's a bit of a problem because even if it's a (partial) failure as far as project management goes, competition is so low that if you're a US-aligned state and want a 5th generation fighter, the F-35 is still the only reasonable option. In general, even if something is awful as product and its development was a disaster, if it's monopoly on something important it is still going to sell.

Bayart 3y ago

> If F-35 is such a failure, how come many countries have chosen to buy it? The F-35's "killer feature" is non other than the US nuclear umbrella.