Thanks Don for this article!
via Politico
Feb 3, 2014Long story short?
OSD TOLD THE NAVY: YOU CAN’T TAKE A ‘BREAK’ FROM THE F-35C: According to a congressional source, in its 2015 budget proposal, the Navy asked to take a three-year “break” from its production of the F-35C, its variant of the Joint Strike Fighter. Concerned this was a first step toward walking away from the program permanently, OSD told the Navy: no way.
It’s an open secret that the Navy would prefer to invest more in its F-18 fighters rather than buy the F-35C. But if the Navy pulled out of the program, the unit cost — already under scrutiny — would go up for the Air Force and the Marine Corps.
The US Navy wants out!
The OSD is FORCING THEM to stay with the questionable program. The only question left is when does Congress step in and say enough is enough and shit can the entire drain on our resources.
UPDATE: This deserves more comment than a bit of glee about being proven right about the Navy wanting out (I love how they're labeling it as conventional wisdom now). This is more proof of the issues that the F-35C is facing when it comes to getting aboard ship, points to lingering doubt about the planes combat effectiveness AND illustrates the fact that it isn't sunshine and unicorns inside the JSF program. This thing is falling apart right before our eyes.
I think the US Navy is wising up and trying to shift all their funding to the Advance Super Hornet or Super Hornet International Roadmap
ReplyDeletei contend that the Navy has been "wise" to this program since at least 2011...when the program was first restructured. but i do agree that they see the Advanced Super Hornet as being a more cost effective and militarily effective weapon. the F-35 is trash. 100% garbage.
DeleteI believe the Advance Super hornet or the Super Hornet International Road map is fast becoming the F-35 Back up. Maybe the only F-35 worth putting into full production is the F-35A model. The F-35B can be put in the R&D dept until they fix all the bugs and The C can be scrapped.
DeleteI wonder what the JSF fan club will have to say about this. I'm almost excited to hear their response this time.
ReplyDeletethat really isn't the question. the real question is what will our allies say? they can get interoperability with the Advanced Super Hornet. additionally did you read the garbage that Loren Thompson put out this morning? i like the guy but he's been wrong on the F-35 and refuses to back off the position. its getting to be embarrassing.
DeleteLoren Thompson is nothing more than a shill for LockMart. His "think tank" was founded by a former Lockheed lobbyist for Christ's sake!
DeleteHe even has the audacity to suggest LockMart should get credit for Bin Laden!
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/06/lexington-seals-corporations/
The guy's a corporate whore in the worst way and a prime example of what's wrong with America's military industrial complex.
I just found that article by Loren Thompson. I did not see that before you mentioned it. It is written like a true F-35 salesmen. I guess Doug's post explains it.
DeleteThe Navy is a slave to this program. However, the Super Hornet still has a life line from that $75 million that was added to the budget for a purchase in 2015 of 22 jets. However, without money freed up from the F-35C, it looks like the little money the Navy does have to spare they are spending keeping the line open as long as possible and the upgrades from the Advanced Super Hornet are unlikely to be bought for now. This just keeps getting more and more interesting as time goes on.
We are talking about the United States Government here. As you post mentions, the Navy is being forced to continue on with the trainwreck that is the Joint Strike Fighter. My question is, what is going to have to happen to put the F-35 down for good?
ReplyDeleteF-35 problems, quoted from FY2013 DOT&E Test report (not a complete list)
ReplyDelete--Little progress was made in completing flight testing required by the baseline Block 2B joint test plan.[necessary for IOC]
--The F-35 is vulnerable to ballistically-induced propellant fire from all combat threats.
--Weapons integration, which includes both flight sciences and mission systems test events, did not make the planned progress in CY13.
--Flight operations of production aircraft and upcoming operational testing of Block 2B capability depend on the functionality of the Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS), which has been fielded with significant deficiencies.
--Overall suitability performance continues to be immature, and relies heavily on contractor support and workarounds unacceptable for combat operations.
--The vulnerability of the F-35 to electrical system ballistic damage remains an open question.
--Buffet and TRO [transonic roll-off] continue to be a concern to achieving operational combat capability for all variants.
--The program added 139 pounds to the F-35C weight status to account for the redesigned arresting hook system. [That's a lot of weight. The F-35C is now scheduled to go the boat in October.]
--The availability rate of F-35C's at Eglin AFB was 32%. The F-35C Mean Flight Hours Between Critical Failure (MFHBCF) was 2.7 and the F-35C Mean Corrective Maintenance Time for Critical Failure (MCMTCF) was 9.6. [So the F-35C will fly for only 2.7 hours before 9.6 hours are required for corrective maintenance time. Damn, only one engine, too, out over the deep blue water. ]
It can't fall apart soon enough. I'm worried this train wreck will take so long to grind to a halt that it'll take a lot of good hardware with it.
ReplyDeleteumm, all the "good hardware" you speak of is no longer in production, or is a 20 year old design.
DeleteI didn't specify what hardware I was speaking of. There are programs in development that are being cancelled or postponed to keep the money for the F-35. Thanks for the reply.
DeleteNot just the Us Navy, the Marines should buy Super Hornets too and the USAF Super Vipers and more F-22 and a lot of Stealth drones like the Avengers with 3000 pounds of internal weapons load for the 3 forces. The allies could do the same, except for the F-22.
ReplyDeleteThe F-35 program from its initiation has emphasized foreign participation, and the US has had "partners" which have contributed funds for development.
ReplyDeleteOf the eight partners, five (UK, Italy, Netherlands, Australia, Norway) have ordered some planes and three (Canada, Turkey, Denmark) have not. No foreign countries have indicated any interest in F-35C, so it's only Navy (260) and Marine Corps (80) who want the carrier variant.
UK Defence Minister Hammond is expected in Washington this week with an order for 14 F-35B. These aircraft are intended for use on UK's new big carriers Queen Elizabeth and Duke of Wales. The QE is sailing out this year for sea trials, and the UK wants to put planes on her in a couple years. Of course the F-35B even it were fully functional is completely unsuited for big carrier use, but Hammond pretends not to know that.
Meanwhile, USAF Gen. Mike Hostage, head of Air Combat Command, readily admits that the F-35 IS NOT an air-superiority fighter:
ReplyDelete"The F-35 is not built as an air superiority platform. It needs the F-22."
Yeah... That'll help foreign sales in countries looking to make the F-35 its ONLY fighter.
http://www.airforcetimes.com/article/20140202/NEWS04/302020005/Air-Combat-Command-s-challenge-Buy-new-modernize-older-aircraft
Good point, but the F-35 has little appeal to most countries on its own "merits." (cost & performance)
DeleteBy the way I was struck by Hostage's first-person ownership of his command. Reminds me of Obama, not a team player, --not we but I.
-- so I reduce the overall capability of the Air Force, and I am in a worse place then I would have been if I just cut the whole A-10 fleet.
--But they are still cutting the budget so I have to do something, and, unfortunately, the something that is left is worse than cutting the A-10 fleet.
-- It appears that I will be told I have to continue to purchase Global Hawks, and given the budget picture that we have, I cannot afford both the U-2 and the Global Hawk.
--I am going to fight to the death to protect the F-35 because I truly believe the only way we will make it through the next decade is with a sufficient fleet of F-35s.
That's why the F-35 is totally unnecessary. More F-22 , A-10 and Super Vipers with stand off weapons will do the job much better for the USAF.
ReplyDeleteGood thing the F-22 line is still open... oh wait, it was shuttered in 2011.....
DeleteAnd A-10s haven't been produced in 20 years.
we still have the blueprints for the F-22 and it's only a matter of time before we can reopen the F-22 line.
DeleteThanks for making us aware of Thompson's latest paid for by LMT rebuttal.
ReplyDeleteI guess my only question is if these reports don't matter, why do we even bother producing them? Just trust LMT and Thompson and not worry our little brains with stuff we don't understand....I don't think so.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/lorenthompson/2014/02/03/five-reasons-the-latest-pentagon-testing-report-on-the-f-35-fighter-doesnt-matter/
And then we get articles like from FT:
Delete"US hears conflicting accounts on Lockheed's $400bn F-35 fighter"
Sure, conflicting between truth from the chief test guy on the one hand, and BS financed by LockMart (using our money) on the other. Some contest.
Why I'm not surprised with the US Navy frustration with the F-35
ReplyDeletewww.youtube.com/watch?v=T8l3BLn0V-8
I know this is stating the obvious but Solomon you're an idiot sorely in need of a remedial course in reading comprehension.
ReplyDeletePlease define.
DeleteHowever, I am pretty sure Politico spews leftist BS mostly, so I don't know why Solomon goes there.