Should we buy the F-35?

[sodopro]

You know, the F-35. In my opinion, the worst fighter ever made.

So, should we (any country buying the F-35) buy it?

Any other choices out there?

[Trux]

The Harrier? Still completely viable (If they weren't scrapped) in performance.

[Hocki]

Norway is planning on buying the F-35A CTOL and replace it with the F-16 we are currently using. I think it's a good idea. Even of it's not the F-35B STOVL it's still an impromevement from the F-16 which were released in 1978...

[Pursuedtank]

Really it is getting to a point where manned fighter aircraft are starting to become pointless. There aren't many things a drone can't do that a manned fighter can and there are many things it can do better.

[Extemporary]

In the Fifties, they said that manned fighters were useless since ICBMs existed. And yet we still use fighters sixty years later.

[Custard Donut (In Space)]

I read the other day the sudden popularity of unmanned drones may be short lived due to new laser technology that can burn them out of the sky, harder to pin-point manned jet-fighters (or so the article said.)

A question that springs to my mind is, why are we making so little progress that we still need so much weaponry? Is there any point at which we can come to some agreement as a planet and stop fighting? How long have we been around, 40.000 years or so? And we're still blowing each other up, i find it very sad.

[ZedNova]

A question that springs to my mind is, why are we making so little progress that we still need so much weaponry? Is there any point at which we can come to some agreement as a planet and stop fighting? How long have we been around, 40.000 years or so? And we're still blowing each other up, i find it very sad.

Not to get off topic, but we won't be able to stop real war until we invent the matrix and put everyone in it.

[drakesdoom]

Not to get off topic, but we won't be able to stop real war until we invent the matrix and put everyone in it.

Won't we just be fighting virtual wars then?

[karolus10]

F-35 is surely one of most expensive US military programs ever, cost of F-35 is so unreasonable high, that (even) NASA could put man (not only one) on Mars easily with such funding... and we taking about weapon system that aren't superior over F-22 and could be never deployed during their service... not really understand US reasoning .

Edited May 5, 2013 by karolus10

[lobsterbark]

Won't we just be fighting virtual wars then?

Exactly.

tenchar

[chobit-389]

NO.

The F-35 is a complete piece of @#$*. Not only is it expensive as a small country to operate, it takes even more time to train crews to operate them. The plane itself is the early M16 compared to the rugged and reliable AK-47 that constitutes EVERY OTHER PLANE EVER MADE.

Canada is planning it's own fighter because we've pulled out of the F-35 project:

[Trux]

That is one beautiful looking plane...

Wait... Is it real? I couldn't find it online

Edited May 5, 2013 by Trux

[karolus10]

In this rate, every US trooper after 2020 will use pistol bullets costing 10k dollars for each cartridge, USA military is so rich .

[chobit-389]

That is one beautiful looking plane...

Wait... Is it real? I couldn't find it online

It's the CF-XX Super Arrow, proof Canadians don't need Yankee hand-holding to survive

[Eric S]

It's the CF-XX Super Arrow, proof Canadians don't need Yankee hand-holding to survive

Wait, you thought the hand-holding was for your benefit? *snicker*

[sodopro]

Now now, I think that we can agree that it's a mutual relationship.

Until you guys tried to bribe us into the F-35. No. Just No.

Also, pardon me, but the CF-XX just isn't all that viable. Not only is it NOT supported by the government, it also doesn't have all that much of an advantage over the F-22 or the PAK FA.

No, it's not 7th gen. The most right now is a planned 6th gen by Boeing, the F/A XX. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixth-generation_jet_fighter

Another thing: the Avro Arrow (Original) was HUGE. 24 meters (77 feet to the Yanks). And, if I read the website for the Super Arrow correctly, the Super Arrow is supposed to be even bigger. Getting that into the air will be near impossible. Even the F-22 is only 19 meters.

Not to shoot anything down. (No pun intended) I'm a Canadian too, but the way I see it, we would be better off just ordering some Super Hornets, like the Aussies.

Edited May 6, 2013 by sodopro

[Leonov]

In making the F-35 the US is phasing out the F-18, which is a multi-role fighter.

The F-22 is a completely different role, it was designed from the ground up for air superiority. Note the Crazy HUD Helmet intergration device.

Stealth Technology is a great thing to have in a modern battlefield, agianst a modern enemy.

That being said it would be more cost effective for contries to buy the aging F-18 platform, The bugs are worked out and its been in service enough for parts to be realitvly cheap(as far as fighter jet parts go).

Edited May 6, 2013 by Leonov

[chobit-389]

blah blah blah

I've seen the elevators fall right off an F-22 on the tarmac. ANYTHING is better than that.

And just because an aircraft is large doesn't mean it can't move or get in the air, case and point: Mriya.

As a former pilot, I can guarantee that the CF-XX is better than the F-22

[Leonov]

I've seen the elevators fall right off an F-22 on the tarmac. ANYTHING is better than that.

And just because an aircraft is large doesn't mean it can't move or get in the air, case and point: Mriya.

As a former pilot, I can guarantee that the CF-XX is better than the F-22

i would love to see wargames between the two when the CF-XX gets off the drawingboard.

[pharoahjared]

not really understand US reasoning .

The reasoning being that if you throw enough money at the problem it will go away, this kind of thinking off puts other nations because they don't have the same amount of money the US has.

[Tommygun]

Well the F-22 and F-35 are much too expensive, but to be fair I don't think I have seen a big defense aircraft or vehicle the wasn't called a useless death trap at some point in it's development.

All these complicated new systems go though this period. They will fix the problems eventually, of course this will make them even more expensive.

For now foreign countries would be better off buy modernized F-18 and then wait 15 years or so and then buy used or updated F-35.

Right now who would they be fighting that they would need such an advanced plane.

Air forces are better off with a mixture of high tech and lower tech aircraft. An A-10 versus an F-15 Strike Eagle may be good example.

Somethings are just overkill for some missions.

Edited May 6, 2013 by Tommygun

[rditto48801]

To heck with the F-35...

Where does it fail? Close Air Support (CAS).

The nice, new, expensive F-35B variant, expected to replace the A-10... is said by some to be 'giant leap backwards', as it cannot handle the amount of sorties the A-10 can handle.

The A-10 is cost effective (under $12 million), reliable (can literally loose an engine or all hydraulics and still fly), durable (can loose a chunk of a wing and still fly, or fly through 200mph hailstorms based on stuff of using an A-10 for weather research), hard to shoot down (easier just to shoot down a half dozen modern jets in terms of how much punishment it can take), and has one heck of a loiter time with an impressive 16,000 pounds of ordnance/equipment, or the big GAU-8/A Avenger 7 barrel 30mm gatling cannon.

And if they could have an option to 'turn off' the system that throws the GAU-8/A 'off balance', the thing could unload those 30mm rounds into a very small radius (and make it a lethal air to air combatant... I would like to see a modern jet handle a few 30mm explosive rounds in the tail pipe)

Yes, I am an A-10 fan... and a fan of the good old F-14 and its Phoenix missiles (100+ mile engagement range? Yes, please.)

Maybe someone should cobble together a jet with parts from an F-18 and Mig-29... see what the result is...

I hope they aren't working 'to hard' on the flexibility of the F-35... to not try to make the base design be able to handle to many things at once with the same basic airframe... If it is made to be too flexible of a design, could it end up falling short in ways other than not effectively competing with a 40 year old jet in the CAS role?

Reminds me of the F-4 Phantom all of a sudden... back during the Vietnam war... the 'inferior' North Vietnamese Migs flew circles around the F-4 (perhaps quite literally). A few US airmen had to resort to a 'borrowed' Russian gun pod to prove the F-4 needed a gun for air combat... (several hundred k+ for a missile, or a few hundred bucks for for big bullets... geez, I wonder what is more cost effective for shooting down aircraft...)

The rest of the world at the time apparently didn't get or otherwise ignored the US's memo that missiles were the way to go and to stop using highly maneuverable gun equipped airplanes in air to air combat...

Sometimes, the 'whiz kids' and 'experts' don't quite live up to those names...

I will not be surprised if some other nation decides to throw out the whole 'air superiority' thing and go strait to 'air domination' and come up with some cheaper aircraft that will make the F-35 not so useful in air to air combat...

Less gimmicks, more improving what is known to work... and hoping the F-35 is not being made mainly as a source of income for defense contractors, and not as the next best thing in jet designs...

[sodopro]

The A-10 Part

The A-10 is one of the most beautiful birds out there. Looks badass, IS badass, and you can't really compete with that 30mm. F-35B can't hold more than the A-10. I'll bet on that. (Payload btw)

[drakesdoom]

I hope they aren't working 'to hard' on the flexibility of the F-35... to not try to make the base design be able to handle to many things at once with the same basic airframe... If it is made to be too flexible of a design, could it end up falling short in ways other than not effectively competing with a 40 year old jet in the CAS role?

Congress already blew that. Made them all use the same airframe in an attempt to save costs. In the end though the extra weight of the vtol frame they now all share even if not vtol cuts out like 1k lb bomb capacity.

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

Have you ever wondered why new software comes all the time? Why companies just can't stop releasing new stuff? The company I work for is constantly adding stuff to the system and not improving what they already have. Innovation or stagnation seems to be the key.

That is pretty much what is going on with the F-35. You have an industry, companies, people, they have to be working on something or the industry will stagnate. Why don't they work on an improved version of an already existing plane? Dunno, probably the same reason Microsoft releases new versions of Widows instead of adding stuff and polishing say, Win7.

BTW, about the A-10. There are no factories to produce parts for it anymore. The A-10 flying today run on surplus parts. For some reason, it seems logical to set up new production lines for aircrafts than are not in production yet, instead of keeping the old ones open.