Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yup.
Like a lot of other failed aircraft projects, there were too many conflicting elements in the Pentagon's list of necessities to have ever been practical.
The F-35 was supposed to be the first jet fighter all the NATO nations would use equally.
That in itself would kill any development that came through competition, and could make the entire fighter fleet vulnerable to one superior jet developed by some nation outside of NATO.
It was supposed to be a stealth fighter.
Stealth means slow. Fighters need to be fast. So the F-35 is slower than the F-16, the F-15, and the F-18. Slower than some of the English and French jets, and slower than the Russian jets.
Stealth may become obsolescent before the F-35's problems are ever solved.
The need for manned fighters will always be there, but the number of those airplanes can be questioned in these days of drones. Humans flying airplanes has become a specialized need now, where it was formerly a given necessity.
The F-35's concept was flawed from the beginning, and no amount of fixing will ever correct a flawed concept. Especially when we have aircraft that already fill the role better and are in the air every day, right now.
I was waiting for this. Someone , somewhere was going to come out and say this was going to happen anyway. When was the last time a contractor called the boss and said I am revising my costs down.
Except that is, obviously, not what happened here.
Quote:
I've heard his message loud and clear about reducing the cost of the F-35," Hewson said in a statement. "I gave him my personal commitment to drive the cost down aggressively."
Anyone here care to put a dollar amount on a CEO's "personal commitment"? No? It's feel-good fluff.
Having taxpayers pay at least a million dollars a day for security for his wife and child to live in NY is a pretty hard pill for most of us to swallow.
21st century America in a nutshell: Low-wage earners pay taxes to provide security for a billionaire who doesn't. And then they vote for him.
Didn't you hear? Lockhead planned to lower costs 3 years ago, without anyone asking them to, LOL.
Love me some back peddling...
Trump pushed them into a corner, and now all of sudden they're going to do what they had been planning all along?
"Since we got busted we'll do the right thing, which is what we had planned on doing anyway"
You can't see any problems with this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA
21st century America in a nutshell: Low-wage earners pay taxes to provide security for a billionaire who doesn't. And then they vote for him.
You mean Obama?
$80M in vacations that we tax payers have footed. He has been the most expensive high maintenance President in history. GWB mostly vacationed at his ranch and family home in Kennebunkport, while the Obama's have always chosen to stay in exclusive and very very expensive resorts and clubs.
The program should've been ended a helluva long time ago. Lowering costs? Please...they've already robbed the American people for hundreds of billions. Now they're acting as if they're doing us some big ass favor?
Didn't you hear? Lockhead planned to lower costs 3 years ago, without anyone asking them to, LOL.
This dance over the F-35 cost has been ongoing for years between Lockheed, Congress, DoD, GAO etc negotiating and reassessing & restructuring the project. Promises have been made and broken, and payments have been withheld etc. The back-and-forth about the cost started about 12 years ago. The only thing which changed was the Tweeting about it. In the end of the day it will cost what it will cost. Boeing got Trump to shut up by telling him they will build the AF-1s under $4 billion, which was never the contract price anyway, and now it seems Lockheed did the same.
Having taxpayers pay at least a million dollars a day for security for his wife and child to live in NY is a pretty hard pill for most of us to swallow. And you should be upset as well because Trump doesn't care about our taxes paying for that. But of course you're not. So who cares about Trump and Lockheed. It's all just for show with Trump.
once again i remind you that money would have been spent anyway, so you are using a false flag.
Quote:
Originally Posted by banjomike
It was supposed to be a stealth fighter.
Stealth means slow. Fighters need to be fast. So the F-35 is slower than the F-16, the F-15, and the F-18. Slower than some of the English and French jets, and slower than the Russian jets.
stealth mean slow? did you forget about the raptor? it is a stealth fighter and is as fast as the F15, and it super cruises at speeds up to mach 1.5(no afterburners needed to get there).
Oh boy ! Trump is going to reduce military spending!
I believe he;s going to change the way military spending is done. The defense contractors have turned the bidding process into their own personal piggy bank. THAT alone will bring down costs and raise quality.
I believe he;s going to change the way military spending is done. The defense contractors have turned the bidding process into their own personal piggy bank. THAT alone will bring down costs and raise quality.
It's called competition.
Nah...it'll never happen. This country has let the Pentagon run amok for nearly 70 years, and this incoming president and his Republican minions in Congress will not and cannot reign them in even if they wanted to. And they DON'T want to reign it in to begin with. They're promising to spend even more.
The Pentagon and Defense Establishment is a government unto itself, and they will not be reigned in by any president or Congress. It's our fault as citizens for holding up the military above every other institution in society as if it's some giant on a hill, and making it a sacrosanct institution. They've taken it to heart, and they've usurped powers that they weren't intended to have.
It's not the fault of "defense contractors" as you say. They're nothing if they hadn't been empowered by their buddies in the Pentagon and Congress. You'd take the money too if it was on the table. They can hardly be blamed for takng advantage of a system that was INTENTIONALLY set up for them to profit hugely. And of course, the military and Congress have fat cat jobs waiting for them when they leave Washington...IF they leave Washington to begin with.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
