Forgot your password?
The Military Government

More Bad News For the F-35 401

Posted by Soulskill
from the flights-of-fancy dept.
schwit1 sends this news from Aviation Week: "A new U.S. Defense Department report warns that ongoing software, maintenance and reliability problems with Lockheed Martin Corp's F-35 stealth fighter could delay the Marine Corps' plans to start using its F-35 jets by mid-2015. It said Lockheed had delivered F-35 jets with 50 percent or less of the software capabilities required by its production contracts with the Pentagon. The computer-based logistics system known as ALIS was fielded with 'serious deficiencies' and remained behind schedule, which affected servicing of existing jets needed for flight testing, the report said. It said the ALIS diagnostic system failed to meet even basic requirements. The F35 program, which began in 2001, is 70 percent over initial cost estimates, and years behind schedule, but top U.S. officials say it is now making progress. They have vowed to safeguard funding for the program to keep it on track. Earlier this week, the nonprofit Center for International Policy said Lockheed had greatly exaggerated its estimate (PDF) that the F-35 program sustained 125,000 U.S. jobs to shore up support for the program."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

More Bad News For the F-35

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 24, 2014 @11:22AM (#46056421)

    This plane's engine is being built in Speaker John Bohener's state of Ohio. .

    The F135 engine for the F-35 aircraft is a Pratt & Whitney product, from Connecticut, not a GE engine from Ohio.

  • Re: Waste of money (Score:4, Informative)

    by Lumpy (12016) on Friday January 24, 2014 @11:27AM (#46056487) Homepage

    A lot of people forget that there are AWACS way up there that will identify a jamming source and relay to another aircraft to smoke them. We utterly owned IRAQ's "best military in the world" because every time the lit up the radar on their anti aircraft installs, we send a nice big present to them automatically.

    and if someone thinks that a soldier on the ground is going to have a shoulder mounted jammer, well they are funny as hell. I dare them to just keep a laser pointer aimed at a dime on the top of a stick that is 300 yards away, because that is a lot easier than doing the same to a fighter jet in the sky.

  • by jacknifetoaswan (2618987) on Friday January 24, 2014 @11:53AM (#46056837)

    I agree with your assessment, 100%. For instance, the US Navy tried to replace their SLQ-32 electronic warfare suite, which has been around since the 1970s, in the 1990s. Because the system that was currently utilized worked, and worked well, they couldn't build a better system. Despite the ship sets not being built for decades, they're still in use, and when a ship that has a console is decommissioned, they pull the console from that ship and put it on a new, to-be-commissioned ship. All because they can't build a better replacement.

  • by microbox (704317) on Friday January 24, 2014 @12:03PM (#46056927)
    Does anyone care about the actual people who live in the Falklands, and what they want? The UK government did. The Argentinian junta refused to accept the self-determination of the Falklanders. Hence there was a breakdown in negotiations over the island. I grew up hating Thatcher, but learning the history, I realize she did the right thing, and the world is better for it.
  • Re:Rube Goldberg (Score:5, Informative)

    by alen (225700) on Friday January 24, 2014 @12:36PM (#46057293)

    B1, B2, B52 rely on air superiority

    the F22 and F35 is what kills off the opposing pilots in enemy fighters to give the bombers unopposed air space
    go read up on the B17 and other bombing missions in WW2. pilots were almost guaranteed to die since the loss rates were close to 30% per mission in the early days. only after long range fighters were developed did the loss rates go down.

  • by AmiMoJo (196126) * <> on Friday January 24, 2014 @02:08PM (#46058459) Homepage

    Settling land is not a legitimate way to take it from another country. Argentina has at least an arguable claim that the land was occupied and that the settlement is illegal.

    You also need to check the historical records, particularly documents that recently came to light under the 30 year rule. It seems we were negotiating with the Argentinians and could have easily avoided a war. Various ideas were thrown around, including giving most of the islands back but allowing the British citizens to remain part of the UK and govern themselves. Thatcher decided she wasn't going to compromise though.

    Even during the war she made dubious decisions. The way she used it afterwards to win an election was pretty low too, showing her cynicism and lack of care for the lives (British and Argentinian) she threw away.

    Of course Argentina at the time was ruled by the military and shares a lot of the blame, but trying to paint Thatcher as some kind of hero protecting the realm and people's freedom is a gross distortion of history.

The meat is rotten, but the booze is holding out. Computer translation of "The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak."