4 ms·

The F-35 is receiving so much scrutiny because of the exorbitant cost of the program and the very poor product that program produced for the american taxpayer.

by centro 11y ago

The F-35 is receiving so much scrutiny because of the exorbitant cost of the program and the very poor product that program produced for the american taxpayer. Better fighters have been produced in far less time for far less money. I think it's receiving so much attention on HN because it's an example of poor engineering.

exar0815 11y ago
Well, the thing is, nobody really needa a Wonderplane like the F-35. Yes, the Marines need a VTOL plane, but they could be developed cheaper, probably on the base of the old AV/8B. A-10 is still fine for CAS. Maybe ask the Israelis in turn about modernization options for "older" planes. Generally, countries that have to make do with "old" hardware have pretty good Ideas. E.G. the Olifant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centurion_tank#South_Africa https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centurion_tank#South_Africa The Sufa http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/f-16i/ http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/f-16i/
- dragonwriter 11y ago
  > Well, the thing is, nobody really needa a Wonderplane like the F-35. The do-everything F-35 was actually supposed to be a cost management idea, since the exploding cost of new generation fighter programs was so big, we were just going to do one of them, rather than several for different roles. This would, the theory went, be cheaper in total for development, plus the shared parts would make them cheaper in operation, then separate role-specific airframes. And, radically expensive and problem-prone as F-35 has been, that still might all be true. It might have been far more expensive, both in development and operational costs, to develop separate airframes for the various roles.
  - GVIrish 11y ago
    Unfortunately the shared parts ratio is far lower than what was planned. It was supposed to be 80% commonality between variants but it's more like 25%. Furthermore, because they tried to make the aircraft meet contradictory requirements it has resulted in a plane that doesn't do several things as well as even the aircraft it is replacing, much less newer aircraft on the battlefield. All at an astronomical cost. At a certain point it just doesn't make sense to pay far more for a weapons system that doesn't do anything well.
  - jessaustin 11y ago
    The do-everything F-35 was actually supposed to be a cost management idea, since the exploding cost of new generation fighter programs was so big, we were just going to do one of them, rather than several for different roles. ...and if you ever bought that, they've also got a bridge they'd like to sell you. The goal is to spend money. This is just their latest innovation in achieving that goal.

by centro 11y ago

exar0815 11y ago

Well, the thing is, nobody really needa a Wonderplane like the F-35. Yes, the Marines need a VTOL plane, but they could be developed cheaper, probably on the base of the old AV/8B. A-10 is still fine for CAS. Maybe ask the Israelis in turn about modernization options for "older" planes. Generally, countries that have to make do with "old" hardware have pretty good Ideas. E.G. the Olifant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centurion_tank#South_Africa https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centurion_tank#South_Africa The Sufa http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/f-16i/ http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/f-16i/

dragonwriter 11y ago
> Well, the thing is, nobody really needa a Wonderplane like the F-35. The do-everything F-35 was actually supposed to be a cost management idea, since the exploding cost of new generation fighter programs was so big, we were just going to do one of them, rather than several for different roles. This would, the theory went, be cheaper in total for development, plus the shared parts would make them cheaper in operation, then separate role-specific airframes. And, radically expensive and problem-prone as F-35 has been, that still might all be true. It might have been far more expensive, both in development and operational costs, to develop separate airframes for the various roles.
- GVIrish 11y ago
  Unfortunately the shared parts ratio is far lower than what was planned. It was supposed to be 80% commonality between variants but it's more like 25%. Furthermore, because they tried to make the aircraft meet contradictory requirements it has resulted in a plane that doesn't do several things as well as even the aircraft it is replacing, much less newer aircraft on the battlefield. All at an astronomical cost. At a certain point it just doesn't make sense to pay far more for a weapons system that doesn't do anything well.
- jessaustin 11y ago
  The do-everything F-35 was actually supposed to be a cost management idea, since the exploding cost of new generation fighter programs was so big, we were just going to do one of them, rather than several for different roles. ...and if you ever bought that, they've also got a bridge they'd like to sell you. The goal is to spend money. This is just their latest innovation in achieving that goal.