It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

It's confirmed, the F35 sucks

page: 1
10
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 06:24 PM
link   
Well, it's just as we all had feared. The F35 program, which has cost nearly half a trillion dollars, cannot do what it was designed to do.

Click HEREfor for the analysis.

Click HEREfor the detailed report (PDF).

I suggest you read the analysis points from the first link.

They are:

Electronics Used to Justify Cost Not Delivering Capabilities
Ineffective as a Fighter
Ineffective as an Interdiction Bomber
Ineffective as a Close Air Support Platform
Navy’s F-35 Unsuitable for Carrier Operations
Price Tag Is the Only Thing Stealthy about the F-35
Combat Effectiveness at Risk
Can the F-35 Be Where It’s Needed, When It’s Needed?
F-35 Reliability Problems
Officials Hiding Truth about F-35’s Problems and Delays from Taxpayers
Moving Forward
Conclusion


The F-35 program office has reached a crucial decision point. Bold action is required now to salvage something from the national disaster that is the Joint Strike Fighter. The administration should continue the review of the F-35 program. But officials should not just talk to the generals and executives as they have no incentive to tell the hard truth because they have a vested financial interest in making sure the program survives (regardless of capability). As this report shows, they are not telling the whole story. There are many more people lower down the food chain with other points of view. They are the ones possessing the real story. And, as the above suggestions show, there are still options. It is not too late to make significant changes to the program, as its defenders like to claim.



edit on 30-3-2017 by Tempter because: (no reason given)



+1 more 
posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 06:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Tempter

And yet, they've been kicking ass at just about every exercise they've been involved in since reaching IOC. Including one of the most intense Red Flag exercises in years.

Oh, I should have known they were using Gilmore as their source.
edit on 3/30/2017 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 06:37 PM
link   
That is just so much crap.

Haters gonna hate.

I would love to understand the hate on this platform. Is there a reason behind the hate?

It is designed for a particular mission ... why is that so hard to understand. The Gen 4 aircraft will not even see the F35, only the incoming missiles.

P



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 06:39 PM
link   
a reply to: pheonix358

Because it's not an A-10, F-22, and F-15 rolled into one platform.



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 06:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: pheonix358

Because it's not an A-10, F-22, and F-15 rolled into one platform.


Which is EXACTLY what they sold us on!



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 06:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Tempter

Perhaps more $$$ would help?



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 06:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Tempter

No they didn't. They said it would replace them, not that it was all those rolled into one. It was never described as an air superiority fighter, but as a tactical bomber capable of fighting air to air, which is exactly what it does.

The only argument that is accurate was that it was sold as an A-10 replacement, and with the exception of the gun it is. But for that matter, so is the B-1, F-16, F-18...



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 07:01 PM
link   
That's pretty much what they said about the Bradley and Abrams....
How did those work out?

These will be fine aircraft despite what some "analysts" say.



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 07:01 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

Or perhaps people should realise that they're developing the most complex aircraft ever conceived of. Every single aircraft ever built had fairly serious problems during development, and some of those went on to be some of the best aircraft ever.



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 07:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

I sure hope it is, it is very expensive, but less than the raptor (hanger queen).



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 07:09 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

The Raptor is anything but a hangar queen. It's not exactly tearing up the skies, but they were about 70% mission capable in 2015. That'll improve as they get reskinned.



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 07:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

What new technology doesn't have bugs somewhere along the line? This project has cost so much so far, it's definitely worth finishing.

I don't understand why some people want it to fail. That would just be throwing money to the wind.



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 07:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Wide-Eyes

It doesn't do what they think it should, and all the publicity it gets is negative. I've lost count of the comments I've seen that new aircraft suck and should be cancelled because they don't look like something out of Star Wars, and go Mach 4.



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 07:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Tempter

If it has wings or is airborne .... Listen to Zaphod haha.
edit on 30-3-2017 by CriticalStinker because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 07:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Wide-Eyes

It doesn't do what they think it should, and all the publicity it gets is negative. I've lost count of the comments I've seen that new aircraft suck and should be cancelled because they don't look like something out of Star Wars, and go Mach 4.


Hey, a Tie Fighter would be pretty cool! I'm sure we can find a dumb senator to enact a bill to fund that!

Now, back to reality.

Have you read the report? It doesn't claim it should be scrapped. It does say that some major things need to happen for it to work. Aka, it sucks, currently. I'm not saying it can't work, just that is isnt.

And I'm sure cherry picking some Red Flag events doesn't change the status of the report.



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 07:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

You're right there. It's rare I see positive publicity. Most of it comes from Trump lol.



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 07:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Tempter

I'm well aware of the report, as well as who wrote it. The F-35 has been torn apart in this forum for years. Yes, it has problems, of course it has problems. All new aircraft do. Those problems are being resolved at an increasing rate over the last few years, and at least some of this information is old.

And Red Flag doesn't get cherry picked. It's the most intense exercise anywhere in the world.



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 07:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tempter

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: pheonix358

Because it's not an A-10, F-22, and F-15 rolled into one platform.


Which is EXACTLY what they sold us on!


Like you ever had a choice in the matter...



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 07:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Wide-Eyes

It's kind of a Catch-22. They can counter the negative publicity, or spend their time fixing the problems and getting it through development. Personally, I think they made the right choice. I'd rather they were out working than posting on Facebook about how things are going.



posted on Mar, 30 2017 @ 07:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Yeah, much better to just make it work and prove the naysayers wrong.

When it's finally on form and I believe it will be, it's going to be outstandingly awesome.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join