This Thing Is a Flying Pig

[AFTT47]

It was a project too ambitious to be successful.

But you have to build a new platform to enhance your capabilities to retain air superiority.

Bottom line. It sucks but it's what we need.

[abaris]

All good arguments. But would you like "Murrica" to get out of the game and leave it to the Chinese? What kind of world do you think that would lead to?

What's the big difference, even if your Chinaphobic picture were true? China didn't wage a hot war for decades as opposed to some other country I know of. They're too busy exploiting their own population and flooding the world with cheap junk - often produced by outsourced American and European corporations.

It's not that I love the chinese model so much, but when it comes to domination, both choices really don't seem at all appealing. Ultimately it would lead to the same world we're developing into anyway. Taking a dump on 99 percent of the people to make some select few unimaginable rich.

[Iroscato]

It's difficult to find exact figures, but I heard they've so far sunk a TRILLION dollars into this monstrosity? Can anyone verify that? Because if it's that or a comparable amount, I will be really rather angry about it.

[AFTT47]

It sucks but who would you rather have calling the shots? Murrica or China?

From where I'm standing, both options seem equally appealing. Like the difference between catching the flu and having the shits.

Really? You honestly think the Chinese government given the same power as the American government would have the same effect on the world? I think you're fucking crazy.

It's probably a good thing that American interests are balanced by the interests of foreign powers so we get an amalgam of them but if you think the world would be better by removing the American influence, you are out of your fucking mind.

America is flawed - no doubt about it. But what would you have us replace it with?

[SteelCurtain]

We've shown how long it takes to develop a reliable platform. It's too late to start it if we end up needing it. Part of air superiority is deterrence.

[rexbeccarox]

I can't help it.

[Thumpalumpacus]

It was a project too ambitious to be successful.

To try and pander to the needs of all three flying forces. You needed STOVL for the Marines, a normal platform for USAF, and a larger wing surface and reinforced landing gear for the Navy. The avionics was ahead of its time 10 years ago, and now is too buggy and got cut down to a point where it would be current 10 years ago.

An excellent analysis, especially regarding the differing requirements. The fact that the airplane is being asked to operate under three entirely different doctrines, and operational guidelines, means that it will be inherently more inefficient in each role; it must carry dead weight for the other roles (the USAF version will have heavier landing gear to sell the plane to the Navy as well, although the AF has no need for that build).

In aerodynamics, every pound counts. This plane is underpowered and has too much wing-loading.

What a disaster. But you have to build a new platform to enhance your capabilities to retain air superiority. I think this is a lesson of too many cooks combined with too big for your britches.

We're better off patching the software on the F-22 and forgoing STOVL capability.  And if the Marines want better CAS, let them dig up the best plane for that work, the AD-1.

[SteelCurtain]

An excellent analysis, especially regarding the differing requirements. The fact that the airplane is being asked to operate under three entirely different doctrines, and operational guidelines, means that it will be inherently more inefficient in each role; it must carry dead weight for the other roles (the USAF version will have heavier landing gear to sell the plane to the Navy as well, although the AF has no need for that build).

In aerodynamics, every pound counts. This plane is underpowered and has too much wing-loading.

Well, to be fair, they were designing three different planes, which was the majority of the problem. The landing gear was not the same on all three variants, the wings were not the same, but the fuselage/engine was. They had to design two completely separate avionics suites, the AF and Navy could share one, but the USMC would need a completely different one for the STOVL variant. The Navy was never happy about it, as when you fly over water, having one engine is not the best thing in the world. The Pratt & Whitney powerplant was supposed to be more reliable than any two GE F404's put together. But that didn't make the pilots any more comfortable.

Still, with a Hornet costing $30mil, and a F-35 costing $110mil, it's just hard to swallow all that cost for the last 10 years for a new jet that has one engine, less payload, but stealth and new avionics.

We're better off patching the software on the F-22 and forgoing STOVL capability.  And if the Marines want better CAS, let them dig up the best plane for that work, the AD-1.

The Marines need a new plane more than any of the services. That AV-8B is older than dirt, and the controls are stupid and counter-intuitive. Plus, we have a whole fleet of LHA/LHD amphibious assault ships that are built for STOVL capability.

ETA: I know the Skyraider was awesome. But could you imagine the outrage if they scrapped the F-35 project and brought in a prop plane from the 40's? It would be comical, to say the least. With a couple of enthusiasts cheering on the sidelines and volunteering their airframes.

[Minimalist]

it's just hard to swallow all that cost for the last 10 years for a new jet that has one engine, less payload, but stealth and new avionics.

Especially since the most likely enemy we will face during its operational lifetime can't even make their underwear explode.

[Hatshepsut]

It's difficult to find exact figures, but I heard they've so far sunk a TRILLION dollars into this monstrosity? Can anyone verify that? Because if it's that or a comparable amount, I will be really rather angry about it.

Probably not $1 trillion, but hardly chump change nonetheless. Parker seems to know a lot more about the F35 than I do. Ask him. All I remember is F35 drawing board stuff was buzzing the newswires quite a while ago, back the '80s when Lockheed wasn't even Lockheed-Martin yet.