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

F-35 is built for the wrong war

warontherocks.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 719 posts

Re: F-35 is built for the wrong war

#261

Post by poszlem »

carefree-bob wrote: post #208
0cf8612b2e1e wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the quite likely scenario that Iran goes on any longer, the US will become so war exhausted that we will be unable to provide any support for Taiwan.

The Iran war is a skirmish by any reasonable measure. It does not exhaust either the US Navy or the Airforce, and the Army isn't even participating. Now I understand it has a large impact because of oil prices and the closing of the strait of hormuz, but don't confuse the economic impact of the closing of shipping lanes with something that "exhausts" the US military. Remember this is the military that spent two decad…

This is a misconception, and honestly it's hubris talking. The US has already burned through a big chunk of its key munitions. More than half of its THAAD interceptors, about a quarter of its Patriot stock, roughly 1,000 total with limited yearly production, and a serious slice of Tomahawks, some of which will take years to replace.

Even with ramp ups, you are looking at 3 to 4 years before extra production actually shows up. And for the really constrained systems like GBU-57, cruise missiles tied to Williams engines, or anything needing Chinese gallium, even that timeline is probably optimistic if China keeps export controls in place.

And this constant comparison to Iraq or Afghanistan just does not hold up. Those were wars where the US could sit in safe zones and strike from distance. A Taiwan scenario is completely different. It is right on China’s doorstep, against a peer the US has never actually faced at this scale. Even the USSR was not comparable in terms of economic integration or industrial strength.

edit:

If the ceasefire collapses this Wednesday as Trump has signaled, these numbers will start moving again, and the replacement time estimates will only get worse because the industrial base hasn't yet begun delivering against any of the surge contracts

Re: F-35 is built for the wrong war

#262

Post by benoau »

rjbwork wrote: post #244
benoau wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's crazy is there's lots of videos of Ukranians shooting drones from open-cockpit propeller planes that barely cost more than the drones! I think in a serious drone war we would just have fleets of Cesnas flying around with a person hanging out the door with a shotgun lol.

Then you send a swarm and fly a few sacrificial drones them into the airplanes.

Yeah but that drone swarm costs as much as the Cesna so it neutralizes the cost advantage / disadvantage.

Re: F-35 is built for the wrong war

#263

Post by rurp »

carefree-bob wrote: post #208
0cf8612b2e1e wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the quite likely scenario that Iran goes on any longer, the US will become so war exhausted that we will be unable to provide any support for Taiwan.

The Iran war is a skirmish by any reasonable measure. It does not exhaust either the US Navy or the Airforce, and the Army isn't even participating. Now I understand it has a large impact because of oil prices and the closing of the strait of hormuz, but don't confuse the economic impact of the closing of shipping lanes with something that "exhausts" the US military. Remember this is the military that spent two decad…

Reports are that the US has exhausted certain key capabilities such as high end missiles and interceptors. We've likely used more interceptors in a month against a fourth rate power than Ukraine has in their entire war against Russia. That's extremely damning and irresponsible from a strategic perspective.

Exhausting key functionality like that will absolutely lead to major losses of things like manpower and ships against a near-peer adversary.

Re: F-35 is built for the wrong war

#264

Post by wakawaka28 »

dmix wrote: post #166
jjk166 wrote: post #158

> Meanwhile, modern conflict, from Ukraine’s drone war to naval engagements in the Red Sea to Iran’s own mass missile and drone salvos, increasingly favors systems that can be produced at scale and replaced when lost. The F-35 is a masterpiece. But a force designed around a masterpiece is not designed for long, protracted wars, and U.S. adversaries know this. The problem is that the F-35 was intended to be the low co…

The same issues with fighter jets procurement infect everything these days. Public transit, space, government software, etc.

Not everything. Specifically things where the government is involved. That includes government-subsidized private enterprise.

Re: F-35 is built for the wrong war

#265

Post by moralestapia »

varjag wrote: post #20

Somewhat ridiculous piece. Ukraine, 4 years after, still operates a significant number of jets it entered the war with. This is despite hundreds of attempts to eliminate them on the ground with airstrikes, drones, cruise and ballistic missiles. And naturally F-35s on that theatre would have been a game changer making mass strikes on Moscow possible. For all the dysfunctions of American military industrial complex it…

>mass strikes on Moscow

Oh yeah, I'd like to see you try that.

Maduro was a clown. Iran is two orders of magnitude above Venezuela and the US (plus friends) are already struggling.

Russia is at least one order of magnitude above Iran.

I have no doubt that the US would win at the end, but at a massive cost of life and money. You cannot afford that, you cannot even afford a 1/10th of that.

I live in America, I'm obviously pro-America, but losing touch with reality will only make things worse.

The world is not like your RTS games.

Re: F-35 is built for the wrong war

#266

Post by fooker »

ceejayoz wrote: post #93
fooker wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mass produced means something very different when it comes to wars between comparable powers. There are barely more than a thousand F-35s, the number of US aircrafts used in WW2 was about 300,000. If China produces 100 times or 1000 times their current numbers (and they can), marginal differences in capability are not going to matter.

> If China produces 100 times or 1000 times their current numbers… They get sanctioned and/or hit by B-2s long before the factories to do so are even completed, let alone producing a hundred thousand fighter jets.

If you read my comment (or the article!) a bit more carefully, you'll see I mentioned comparable opponents.

Yes, if you can bomb your opponent without retribution you can indeed get away with what we have now.

This is what the F-35 and the modern US airforce is built for. We're likely not going to be fighting desert nomads forever.

Re: F-35 is built for the wrong war

#267

Post by carefree-bob »

gozucito wrote: post #256
0cf8612b2e1e wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would dispute the depletion of expensive munitions, but I still believe that is largely irrelevant next to political exhaustion. I do not think most Americans would care to defend Taiwan, even against the China boogeyman. The practical realities of losing Chinese goods would be a devastating reality few are prepared to face.

The reality of losing TSMC is no joke either. I remember Covid times when many G20 leaders went to Taiwan begging for some chips so that they could keep exporting cars and other things that need computer chips.

What do you mean by "losing TSMC"? It's not ours.

Do you know what does belong to the west? ASML. What makes TSMC actually work.

Re: F-35 is built for the wrong war

#268

Post by greedo »

jjk166 wrote: post #158

> Meanwhile, modern conflict, from Ukraine’s drone war to naval engagements in the Red Sea to Iran’s own mass missile and drone salvos, increasingly favors systems that can be produced at scale and replaced when lost. The F-35 is a masterpiece. But a force designed around a masterpiece is not designed for long, protracted wars, and U.S. adversaries know this. The problem is that the F-35 was intended to be the low co…

The Booker was a perfect fit for the Army reqs, and filled a genuine need. But it didn't have a sponsor that was willing to pay for it. The Armor Branch didn't like it, and the Infantry Branch, which is the real user couldn't muster enough support in the DoD.

The Connie is a good ship and the two under contract will be fine vessels when they're commissioned. Frigates are no longer "cheap" ships, and the sticker shock was higher than expected despite the obvious changes that were going to be made to the FREMM design. But it's cancellation has more to do with dysfunction at the top of the Navy (and DoD) then the program of record.

Also, you're overestimating the flight hour costs of the F-35. Even the B model doesn't hit $50k. The other variants are closer to $35k/hour (adjusted for inflation) than $50K.

Re: F-35 is built for the wrong war

#269

Post by fooker »

wredcoll wrote: post #159
fooker wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mass produced means something very different when it comes to wars between comparable powers. There are barely more than a thousand F-35s, the number of US aircrafts used in WW2 was about 300,000. If China produces 100 times or 1000 times their current numbers (and they can), marginal differences in capability are not going to matter.

> If China produces 100 times or 1000 times their current numbers (and they can), marginal differences in capability are not going to matter. If china somehow learnes magic and produced 10,000 f16 equivalents and got into a major non-nuclear shooting war with the united states... they'd lose 10,000 planes. At some point there is such a qualitative difference that numbers don't really matter.

You are absolutely right ;) If the US keeps maintaining a several decade technology lead forever, that is..

That has never really happened in history, so good luck I guess.

Re: F-35 is built for the wrong war

#270

Post by rawgabbit »

peterfirefly wrote: post #188
rawgabbit wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe satellites are usually in an orbit. They can’t follow an carrier for example. The satellites may be in a constellation that can track the carrier. That is why anti-satellites weapons have been developed. E.g., a jet fighter flies straight up and then fires a long range missile. https://www.esa.int/Enabling_Support/Space_Transportation/Ty... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-satellite_weapon

Do you think a carrier can very far in the couple of hours it takes for a satellite to orbit around the Earth?

My understanding is to track something like a carrier the satellite has to be in low earth orbit. Those circle the earth about every two hours. So it is not so much the carrier outruns the satellite; it is the satellite outruns the carrier.

https://eos.com/blog/types-of-satellites/

Post reply on HN