What is the future of the F-35?

2022-12-28T10:04:36-05:00

Pretty open ended discussion here but I'd like some insight into the F-35 program. From my perspective it was way over budget and under performs, and most of the time its in the news its for stuff like this:
https://www.defensenews.com/air/2022/12/27/pentagon-grounds-small-group-of-f-35s-after-ejection-on-texas-runway/
Should we be investing more in these fighter planes or direct resources elsewhere?

Pentagon grounds some F-35s after ejection on Texas runway

The F-35 Joint Program Office told services a fuel tube failure may have caused an F-35B's crash, which has now led to some fighters being grounded.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 28 at 2022 10:40 AM

2022-12-28T10:40:16-05:00

I'm sure there will be plenty of politicians that have their hands in that money pot fighting to keep the 35 alive.

Response by SSG Carlos Madden made Dec 28 at 2022 10:59 AM

2022-12-28T10:59:03-05:00

On the plus side at least the ejection seats work
https://twitter.com/cbs11doug/status/ [login to see] 04406530?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

1603466654704406530

Response by COL Randall C. made Dec 28 at 2022 11:35 AM

2022-12-28T11:35:18-05:00

Well, it's the Air Force version of the Army's Bradley Fighting Vehicle (BFV).

Both programs started out to be lightweight/modern updates to what they were replacing.

For the BFV, that was an original design from the late 70s. Cost overruns, mid-production design changes, etc. It started out as one thing (a new type of IFV) to what it is now - something almost on part with a 'light tank'

For the F-35, that was supposed to be a light and inexpensive replacement for the F-16. Instead you get something that is using the most modern (even experimental) technology that is expensive to install and resource (time, labor, cost) intensive to maintain. Add onto it the same type of mid-production shifts the Bradley went through where changes occurred to what role it could do, how it accomplished those roles, etc.

Basically, they both fell victim of "too many cooks in the kitchen" where every politician or someone with an axe to grind was able to influence the program.

In the case of the F-35, parts are currently made in 46 states and 18 of them have an economic impact of over $100M (Texas, where the main plant is, has an almost $5.2B impact followed by California with an almost $5.1B impact)*. With that much 'love' spread around, if someone wanted to kill the program and do something else, you're not likely to get much support in Congress.

Now, to your specific question SSG Carlos Madden - "Should we be investing more in these fighter planes or direct resources elsewhere?". My opinion on that is "in for a penny, in for a pound". There are so many 'sunk costs' in the program, it would be hugely detrimental to scrap it and go with something else.

I can see something that happened with the Bradley happening here. Eventually the Bradley's originally envisioned role was filled by the Stryker - a modern/updated IFV that is mobile and transportable. To that, I could see a new program (maybe you Air Force wonks know of one) that fills the role of the spiritual successor to the F-16* instead of what it is now.

Simply speaking, if you were to compare the F-16 to an older flip-phone and the F-35 to a next generation smart phone, you can see the comparison. Both can make a phone call, but the F-35/smartphone is designed to do everything for everyone and has a resource tail to prove it. Expensive to manufacture, expensive to maintain, and resource intensive in terms of manpower, training, and other logistics.
------------------------------------------------------
* https://www.businessinsider.com/this-map-explains-the-f-35-fiasco-2014-8
* F-16 role - The F-16 Fighting Falcon is a compact, multi-role fighter aircraft. It is highly maneuverable and has proven itself in air-to-air combat and air-to-surface attack. It provides a relatively low-cost, high-performance weapon system for the United States and allied nations.

This Map Shows Why The F-35 Has Turned Into A Trillion-Dollar Fiasco

The plane is too deeply embedded in the American economy to kill

Response by CPT Lawrence Cable made Dec 29 at 2022 9:14 AM

2022-12-29T09:14:36-05:00

The Navy went through a similar period pre Vietnam when they were trying to develop a new Strike Fighter. Attempts at the newest and greatest technology blew the budgets and the planes were not reliable and had high maintenance costs. For once, they got smart and took an existing aircraft and modified it with all the best, but tested and reliable technology and made it subsonic. The result was the A-7 Corsair, which IMO was one of the best ground attack aircraft we ever fielded. Extreme range, well armed and could carry a ton of ordinance. The SLUF (Short Little Ugly Fucker) lasted through all of Vietnam and the Gulf War.