ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel

The F-35 Fighter Aircraft: A Staggering Doomed Mess

Updated on February 12, 2013

America's new F-35 Lightening aircraft is an great example of a mess. The first flight of a prototype was in 2006, yet, it is still NOT in production and over 2400 of them are to be built and bought. In February 2011, the Pentagon put a price of $207.6 million for each of the 32 aircraft to be acquired in 2012. But, the F-35 has been one snafu after another in perfecting this this 5th generation fighter.

According to the most recent budget report, the cost of the 2400 aircraft will be $1 trillion! What kind of number is this??? The previous estimate was a cheap $331 billion!

There has been so many mechanical problems it i mind numbing. Most of those are fixed, however, now the problem is the software used in the aircraft. The problem is so serious that if the code cannot be done, the aircraft is doomed. How much code? Try 10 million lines of software source code. The officer in charge of getting this done has stated, " it scares the hell out of me". Oracle was suppose to have its portion of the code done by Oct. 2013 after spending $1 billion already. Now, the company wants another billion dollars just to get to one-quarter functionality by 2020! Huh? You mean, by 2020, only one-fourth of their portion of the code will done? But, will it work as planned? No bugs? Right!

Many countries counting on buying the F-35 now have said it is too expensive to buy and maintain, if and when, production starts. They are considering other options. As of 2013, 187 have been built and all must not be refitted for a variety of reasons and defects. Lockheed, the company making them, now has laid off workers. Testing the F-35 is suppose to end in 2016. The US Air Force and Lockheed have become and odd couple. The USAF blames Lockheed for the cost overruns and Lockheed blames the USAF for their planning and development of the aircraft's systems and what they want it do to.

Regardless, it is a boondoggle that both parties are stuck with.

Comments

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • profile image

      jo-pointingtheobvious 

      5 years ago

      It suffers from the same flaws as F22.

      -1) High maintenance time and cost : Means less time for pilots to train ,less planes , and it indicates the plane cannot sustain operations in harsh environment.

      -2)Internal payload philosophy: The plane have almost the same flying performance with or without payload....But ! Since it is internal ,the plane is fat. Since plane is fat it has poor maneuverability. And ,unlike classical planes,it cannot drop fueltanks or unneeded payload to improve that. Poor maneuverability means being poor at dogfights...but also poor at dodging ,including long range missiles and SAMs.

      Also....it causes another problem that most military "experts" never saw.

      If the payload is internal...you have to OPEN the bay to shoot or bomb !

      (thx cpt obvious) and it cannot be done at high speed, because it create huge change in the flying profile and huge stress on the hull, risking the plane to crash or tear apart...So , you have to open them at slow speed , but slow speed in air combat or ground attack means taking hits.In modern warfare ,taking hits means to be shot, unless you have minimum armor (or flying a A-10 ).This leads to next point.

      3)Armor. None.

      Sure , a combat aircraft is not a battletank. But no armor at all means that plane can be damaged by small arms fire, and would be shred to pieces by 20+mm cannons. It means low level flying is a deathwish on these shiny things. But, one could argue that one or two holes in a wing wont destroy the plane.Wrong. It has to be placed in context.Our context here is f22 and f35 .These planes are filled with fuel everywhere.

      It means a guerrilla guy having a lucky shot with his ak-47 can torch up these planes ...That is why they cannot be deployed today in warzones, they are just airshow and propaganda tools. Not rugged warmachines.

      If sent in a warzone, they are basically flying flammable coffins.

      4)Stealth.

      A big lie that makes people wet inside.But still a lie.

      Look at these planes.Are they invisible ? No they are huge, they produce incredible noise, heat , and when they open their bay , they have as much radar signature as any plane. In somalia, people spot the OTAN aircraft and choppers with....sentinels equipped with cellphones and (drumroll..) ears and eyes ! XD

      Also ,the so called stealth ability is valid against one or few radars in specific angles.In a modern conflict ,against modern forces ,there are radars everywhere ,on all angles. And most of them will spot the plane, lock it and transmit the information to everybody.

      Lets add that this "stealth skin" of theirs is one of the major reason for the high cost ,high maintenance time and fragility.F22 skin has been described as "vulnerable to...rain" XD

      5)Electronics.

      Honestly i don't know why these 2 planes have such technical problems.

      Lets face it , their software is a total mess leading to pilots deaths.

      The f22 is unable to communicate with anything but f22s and ground bases.Means the pilot cannot coordinate his actions with any other unit...woaw. F22 have one critical failure (one failure causing the destruction of the plane) every 170 minutes ...flying coffin.

      The list goes on and on.

      The "5th generation" is just a marketing toy to make big money ,and the politicians ,who have interests and want their shares of that big money , supported it.But the truth is obvious.

      These are poor designs with poor craftmanship and ludicrous prices.

      USAF is doomed to use the good ol teen series for a long time now ,while europeans and russians develloped 4th and 5th generations fighters that works.Rafales, Sukhois, Eurofighters have none of the problems i exposed. They are real fighters.In short , whatever your propaganda says ,they are better, cheaper and easier to upgrade.

      USAF is dead for 20-40 years if they do not get their money back and buy other planes.Real planes, like f15s, f16s , a10 and all the wonderful aircraft that made what was USAF : The best air force.

    • profile image

      Sanxuary 

      5 years ago

      All programs are doomed for a while. What dooms all of them is based on procurement. More is always cheaper and we have no budget to do either one.

    • profile image

      Kyle 

      5 years ago

      @ DJ

      The F-15 is a 40 year old design and it's losing it's edge even with all the upgrades in avionics. The newer SU-35 variants would be on a level playing field if not for tactics and training. You never want a fair fight in the military. The strength of the F-22 is the ability to shoot down adversaries before they know the F-22 is there. Take a look at the tests of F-15s facing the F-22.

    • DJProfessorK profile image

      Kyle Ilgenfritz 

      5 years ago from York, PA

      What is so wrong with the F-15 again? This F-35 JSF mess is a total fiasco, and everyone will be glad once it's over.

    • perrya profile imageAUTHOR

      perrya 

      5 years ago

      And now they are locked into completing the contract or trying to.

    • UnnamedHarald profile image

      David Hunt 

      5 years ago from Cedar Rapids, Iowa

      In 1914, British Queen Elizabeth-class battleships cost £2,300,000-- or about $250 million in today's dollars, making it cheaper than one of these planes. I read that pilots are still passing out because of problems with the oxygen system. Apples and oranges, but the F-35 is a perfect example of the military industrial complex Ike warned us about.

    • profile image

      Kyle 

      5 years ago

      If you want to see another wasted opportunity, check out the FB-22.

    • profile image

      Kyle 

      5 years ago

      There is no need for it at it's current cost. The Air Force should have just been allowed to order more F-22s, the Navy and Marines should have adopted a carrier variant of the F-22, and for VSTOL they should have created another plane to replace the Harrier. The cost advantage of an F-35 over an F-22 is all but gone. The main difference between the two aircraft is that the F-35 can be exported because it is less effective/advanced.

    working

    This website uses cookies

    As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

    For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://hubpages.com/privacy-policy#gdpr

    Show Details
    Necessary
    HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
    LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
    Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
    AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
    Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
    CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
    Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
    Features
    Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
    Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
    Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
    Marketing
    Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
    Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
    Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
    Statistics
    Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
    ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)