Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

forbes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

701–710 of 1001 posts

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

#701

Post by jessaustin »

medium_burrito wrote: post #100
misiti3780 wrote: post #86

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…

You misunderstand the purpose the F35- it is a jobs and pork program first and foremost, like SLS. It has the side benefit of keeping people trained to build this sort of thing, so SpaceX can hire them. We can build cool shit, but our government and most companies don't optimize for that.

...a jobs and pork program first and foremost, like...

...everything in USA military.

Have we won a war in your parents' lifetimes? Have any of our many military misadventures accomplished any of the goals cited as justification? Has anyone in the Pentagon ever been fired for spending too much money? Does the Pentagon even have any idea what it spends on what?

(The answer to all these questions is "no".)

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

#702

Post by TylerE »

cgearhart wrote: post #200
supernova87a wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe someone with more industry knowledge or interesting sources can corroborate -- But I believe that one of the things that happened to the military aviation industrial complex was that in the WW2, early Cold War era, planes and military development programs were very much driven by individuals or very small teams responsible for designing the requirements, overseeing the planning, and the outcome of new aircraft.…

At least three things happened: - congressional oversight increased, with the result that the purchasing authority is no longer generally the end user. We aren’t just buying a ship (plane, gun, etc.), we’re maintaining a logistics and manufacturing industrial base to produce that type of item (and maintain jobs in congressional districts). So maybe we should buy a few more tanks/ships/bombs than we need so that we do…

> So maybe we should buy a few more tanks/ships/bombs than we need so that we don’t forget

Ironically most modern weapons programs do the exact opposite.

Costs increase.

So they cut orders.

Which just makes the per unit costs increase even more.

So they cut orders again.

Repeat until program fails.

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

#703

Post by Decade »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #640
chmod600 wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's what "pork" means.

Or "stimulus" if you want to cast positive light on it.

That’s sort of a broken window fallacy. A direct stimulus doesn't take away people’s time and materials producing things that nobody wants.

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

#705

Post by Judgmentality »

jki275 wrote: post #699
Judgmentality wrote: post #651

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The aircraft itself is apparently excellent at what it does I have heard the opposite from a test pilot who has flown it. He fucking hates it.

A lot of highly qualified people who have flown it say otherwise. https://www.airspacemag.com/military-aviation/f-35-faces-mos... Chip Berke is an F22 and F35 test pilot, and the first F35 Squadron commander. He's probably the most qualified person on the planet to talk about fifth gen aircraft: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxK6O5--9Z0&t=203s

Admittedly my sample size is 1 so I'm not pretending my anecdata is conclusive, but you have to be wary of what people will say publicly about politically motivated projects.

EDIT: Although to be fair, I wrote that before looking at your links, I feel like that context is important (although I stand by my statement).

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

#706

Post by amznthrwaway »

nerdponx wrote: post #398
notional wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's more than just a jobs program too. It's a reelection plan for senators/house members. Look at what states and districts get these big DoD contracts and then look at what committees the congressmen/women are sitting on. They approve plans that benefit them then direct the funds right into their districts so they can campaign on it. I mean it's not the worst form of corruption but it's pretty shitty when you reali…

But imagine if we put people to work building useful stuff instead of useless stuff. Power grid infrastructure, new bridges, new rail lines, etc.

[dead]

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

#707

Post by wsc981 »

SCAQTony wrote: post #674
bumby wrote: post #512

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The root of the F-35 program's problems is a cost plus style contract that gave Lockheed every incentive to overrun I’m fond of the saying “once you understand people’s incentives, you understand everything” as it applies to contracting. I will add, however, that fixed price contracts have their own problems as it relates to cutting corners. E.g., it can put downward pressure on retaining talent and performing best…

I am not trying to be a smart ass but how about this for an human incentive: Build us plane that fulfills these outlined objectives, that meets are budget requirements, or we will shop somewhere else.

I believe one of the objectives of the F-35 was for the plane to be able to fulfill all kinds of different roles. That idea in itself seems pretty much impossible for me. Especially on a budget.

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

#708

Post by amznthrwaway »

misiti3780 wrote: post #86

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…

The saddest thing about all of this, IMO, is that dishonest hacks like you use the failure of one big-ass program to pretend that nothing good or interesting is happening anywhere.

You are wrong. Peter Thiel is wrong. And both of you should be forced to live in the world that you pretend exists, instead of being allowed to benefit from good, value-adding, hard-working, innovative people.

It fucking sucks that dishonest, ignorant, lazy, good-for-nothing sacks of shit like you are allowed to benefit from innovations that are likely to save your life someday, even as you pretend they don’t exist.

Just because you suck doesn’t mean everyone sucks, you ignorant fuckin’ loser.

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

#709

Post by chillfox »

brianwawok wrote: post #620
bpodgursky wrote: post #530

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The next-gen bomber program (B-21) as far as I'm aware is also going well. Fast purchase of an a platform intentionally only incrementally more advanced than the current model.

Does it have a human pilot? Any combat aircraft project with a human on board should be stopped. It has no hope of long term parity of a drone controlled airplane without having to cart around meat bags with limited speed and turning power.

The problem there is if it gets hacked then in the best case it's grounded and in the worst case it's now the enemies aircraft.

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

#710

Post by qzw »

mathgorges wrote: post #576
qzw wrote: post #271

Is it better for the prospect of peace if the U.S. and its adversaries all have large fleets of cheap warplanes or small fleets of expensive ones? I would argue that the F-35 is not only very expensive for the U.S., but has actually increased the cost of fielding fighter jets (as well as air defense systems) for the entire world. And therefore it has made it more expensive to fight a war for every country. Now ask yo…

This is an interesting point, but I'm not sure I follow. I get how the F-35 has raised the cost of air war for the NATO countries which have bought into the F-35 program. But how has the F-35 program raised the cost of air war for other countries?

Russia, China, India, Pakistan, and several other countries all have 5th gen/stealth fighters under development. Most at least look to have been heavily “inspired” by the F-35/F-22. These new fighters are all quite costly for their respective countries. It’s basically the international military version of “keeping up with the Joneses”.
Post reply on HN