Live data from Hacker News

The U.S. Air Force just admitted the F-35 stealth fighter has failed

forbes.com

381–390 of 1001 posts

Re: The U.S. Air Force just admitted the F-35 stealth fighter has failed

#381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, a while back I was interested "where does billions we spend on national defense actually go" and I came to the conclusion that the DoD is really just a giant jobs program. Ultimately I think the reason we don't have things like flying cars is that the private sector gets stuck in local maxima (such as getting people to click ads) and in the public sector it's very hard to have focused time-blocked short term goa…

I keep seeing people say this. Maybe flying cars just don’t make sense? Wheels work really well when your engine dies. Have you seen people drive in 2d space? You want to add a z axis? What’s the efficiency of a small plane? Surely not better than a Prius. Edit: I looked it up and a Cessna gets ~15 mpg.

> Maybe flying cars just don’t make sense?

I think it's just a placeholder metaphor to represent

Re: The U.S. Air Force just admitted the F-35 stealth fighter has failed

#382

The saddest thing about all of this IMO is they have been working on this for 14 years, and how much money was spent/wasted? Now, read about Skunkworks - they were able to build the SR71 (without supercomputers) in less than half that time and for a fraction of the cost. This isn't just planes, this seems to be everything nowadays. Fission was discovered in 1938/1939 and we dropped two bombs on Japan in 1945. No chan…

I love the SR-71 as much as anyone else, but I don't think that's entirely fair. 12/32 were lost in an accident, so it looks like we lost a lot of reliability in exchange for a much faster development.

Re: The U.S. Air Force just admitted the F-35 stealth fighter has failed

#383
post #16

“The F-35 has failed” is a strong statement that depends on what your definition of success is. Did it fail because it couldn’t replace the F-16? Did it fail because it’s expensive and bloated? Do those things even matter? I’m not defending the F-35 but anyone deeply and intimately familiar with the platform knows and understands that it is a Ferrari. You don’t bring your Acura TSX to a Formula 1 race track to win a…

The F-35 failed because fighter jet airframes aren’t particularly relevant anymore. You can stick the same sensor systems and missiles on just about anything. Improved stealth etc is useful, but F-35’s are only slightly better than 40+ year old jets. Thus hardly worth the price vs cheaply manufacturing a minor update of an older design. Or as the saying goes “quantity has a quality all it’s own.”

Yeah, that's what the Egyptians, Syrians, Jordanians and Iraqis thought in their various fights against Israel through the years. Yet somehow, the Israeli quality came out on top every single time.

Stating the F-35s are "only slightly better than 40+ year old jets shows a stunning lack of knowledge.

Re: The U.S. Air Force just admitted the F-35 stealth fighter has failed

#384

The saddest thing about all of this IMO is they have been working on this for 14 years, and how much money was spent/wasted? Now, read about Skunkworks - they were able to build the SR71 (without supercomputers) in less than half that time and for a fraction of the cost. This isn't just planes, this seems to be everything nowadays. Fission was discovered in 1938/1939 and we dropped two bombs on Japan in 1945. No chan…

I’m in the UK, over here we developed a vaccine to an unknown virus in about 10 months and then gave it to nearly 20 million people in 2 months. I’ll take that over the next generation of pointless aircrafts any day!

Re: The U.S. Air Force just admitted the F-35 stealth fighter has failed

#385
post #47

The test of a combat aircraft is in combat. Nobody will give a fuck what the programme cost or that it couldn’t do X if it gives you a decisive advantage in war. It’s fashionable to hate on the F-35, but let’s face it: if the allies have to establish air superiority somewhere in the world, they will be using F-35s to do so, and I’m not aware that anyone has the platform to stop them.

My question would be: if you buy N drones for price of one F-35, do you get better military value for your money or not? At the very least, N drones can't be destroyed at once (unless stored really carelessly) and can be individually specialized in a way that provides wider spectrum of capabilities. A massive bonus: pilotless aircraft can perform manoeuvres unsurvivable for humans, and the ability to maneuver was alw…

Quantity does have a quality all of its own...

It’s obviously possible to imagine a scenario where you have a massive number of drones, the question would be whether you could channel that into tactics that would give you an advantage. Numeric superiority is sometimes useful, and sometimes a liability.

The F-35 currently has a massive advantage over cutting edge drones - a MK I brain in control of the airframe that cannot be jammed. Its electronic warfare capabilities could create havoc for the drone swarm and deny the enemy remote sensing etc.

Until there’s actual conflict though, it’s pretty much like asking whether Mike Tyson or Bruce Lee would win in a fight :)

Re: The U.S. Air Force just admitted the F-35 stealth fighter has failed

#386
post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not when you have a few adversarial nation-states around the corner that do not consider it a waste of taxpayer money.

A $10 billion investment in anti aircraft missiles that forces a $100 billion investment in aircraft instead of schools and semiconductor fabs is great ROI for an adversarial nation state that knows their government would be wiped off the face of the planet if they ever decided to use them.

Modern AA missile systems are also very expensive - a S-400 battery cost you $500 million. [1]

[1] https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/19/russia-lures-buyers-as-s-400...

Re: The U.S. Air Force just admitted the F-35 stealth fighter has failed

#387
post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well your single customer is your paycheck and your deal with the devil. If you triple the price of what you really think it will take because the gov will be inflating dollar supply by double digits every year and you're working a 10 year project, then the gov may go for a different/multiple contractors. So you have to just milk the project for as long as you can beyond 10 years and hope you can dollar/cost over tim…

Since your customer also will bail you out when you fail what's the point in even trying? It's a lot more profitable to bill like your planes work, but to provide planes made out of cardboard. Until you start executing companies (or CEOs) for incompetence you will keep getting the same results.

Yeah, but that's a pots and kettles issue. We are commenting from our mountain about a business that has dropped into the gutter. None of the parties will change.

Re: The U.S. Air Force just admitted the F-35 stealth fighter has failed

#388
post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have always assumed this and the $500 toilet seats are just making room for black projects. There were no publicly visible budgets for the U2/F117 projects.

I had a friend who, many years ago, got a military contract to manufacture an item. I jokingly asked him if he was competing with $1200 hammers and $500 toilet seats and his response was "if you had any idea how much paperwork and red tape is involved in doing anything with the government you'd say that the $500 toilet seat was under-priced and the contractor probably lost money on every one."

My dad was involved in military aircraft purchasing.

It was very tricky to avoid getting in trouble.

Putting stuff out to bid was the main thing he managed. When possible he just went with previous winners as it cut down the paperwork needed.

Lot of times someone would come in really low on the bid, he knew the people and that it would be crap product. So lots of work to get higher bids approved.

Also apparently if you get a ride in the company limousine, the drivers have tons of juicy gossip.

Re: The U.S. Air Force just admitted the F-35 stealth fighter has failed

#389
post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Curious what your background is to make those statements. My experience from Red Flag and other exercises is that the 5th gens (22 & 35) have a much better K/D and survivability. When you expend all of your stand off weapons or need to get a B-2 deep into a contested airspace, including against SAMs, you need a 35 going in to do sanitization. No F-16 is fighting off both SAMs and a huge ass wave of J-10s or any J-20s…

I have some background wargaming for the DoD. As to Red Flag numbers generally reported, it was setup to heavily favor F-35’s. Amusingly at one point they further boosted the K/D ratio after the fact from 15:1 to 20:1. Actual air war looks very different, with a significant focus on cruse missiles early on etc. But again, comparing the F35 with outdated equipment is missing the point.

Yet you're the one comparing the F-35 to 40+ year old aircraft that would get smoked in combat by the F-35.

Re: The U.S. Air Force just admitted the F-35 stealth fighter has failed

#390
post #10

I would guess that the NGAD prototype[0] has given USAF leadership confidence to publicly alude to F-35 shortcomings. [0] https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/aviation/a34030586...

Well, if USAF want a "cheaper 5th minus" fighter, the NGAD is going almost the opposite direction.
Post reply on HN