5 ms·

> It’s a new plane! First flown in 2006. Introduced 2016.

by gm3dmo 2y ago

datavirtue 2y ago
This project needs scrapped. They tried to make it everything for everyone. Not practical. No danger of retiring the stalwarts anytime soon.
- dralley 2y ago
  It's extremely practical and a good aircraft. Not to mention cheap, now that the development costs are paid for. There is no aircraft in history that did not have hiccups during procurement. Even "ol reliable" platforms like the Blackhawk or the F-16 had much worse reputations when they were first introduced.
- acomjean 2y ago
  You have a good point in that it was supposed to replace all kinds of aircraft. That was kind of its thing. “ intended to replace a wide range of existing fighter, strike, and ground attack aircraft …” One aircraft for the navy, marines and air force would save money was the thinking I imagine. I remember the competition for the design many year ago (there was a Nova tv program) but haven’t been following too closely but it’s had issues filling all the roles. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Strike_Fighter_program https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Strike_Fighter_program
- nradov 2y ago
  It's a little too late for that. The JSF program probably should have been cancelled or completely restructured circa 1996. But now there's no remaining alternative. The inventory of legacy AV-8, F-16, and A-10 aircraft are going to be retired no matter what because they're literally falling apart and it's impossible to keep extending their service lives.
  - datavirtue 2y ago
    You can build five F-18s for the price of one F-35.
    - nradov 2y ago
      Wrong. The current unit cost for an F-35B is about $109M while an F/A-18E/F is about $55M. That's a difference of 2×, not 5×. And more importantly, the F/A-18 can't operate from amphibious ships to support Marine Corps ground forces. If it can't accomplish the required mission then the cost is moot. https://breakingdefense.com/2023/10/newest-f-35-f-15ex-contracts-are-set-but-how-much-do-they-cost-exclusive/ https://breakingdefense.com/2023/10/newest-f-35-f-15ex-contr... It's disappointing to see people post lazy, low-effort comments like this without bothering to do even basic fact checking.
  - gm3dmo 2y ago
    > and it's impossible to keep extending their service lives. B52 projected to last till 2050
    - aceofspades19 2y ago
      B-52s aren't subject to the same stress as fighter aircraft are, that's why they are able to keep flying for so long (among other reasons).

> It’s a new plane! First flown in 2006. Introduced 2016.

by gm3dmo 2y ago

> It’s a new plane! First flown in 2006. Introduced 2016.

This project needs scrapped. They tried to make it everything for everyone. Not practical. No danger of retiring the stalwarts anytime soon.

dralley 2y ago
It's extremely practical and a good aircraft. Not to mention cheap, now that the development costs are paid for. There is no aircraft in history that did not have hiccups during procurement. Even "ol reliable" platforms like the Blackhawk or the F-16 had much worse reputations when they were first introduced.
acomjean 2y ago
You have a good point in that it was supposed to replace all kinds of aircraft. That was kind of its thing. “ intended to replace a wide range of existing fighter, strike, and ground attack aircraft …” One aircraft for the navy, marines and air force would save money was the thinking I imagine. I remember the competition for the design many year ago (there was a Nova tv program) but haven’t been following too closely but it’s had issues filling all the roles. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Strike_Fighter_program https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Strike_Fighter_program
nradov 2y ago
It's a little too late for that. The JSF program probably should have been cancelled or completely restructured circa 1996. But now there's no remaining alternative. The inventory of legacy AV-8, F-16, and A-10 aircraft are going to be retired no matter what because they're literally falling apart and it's impossible to keep extending their service lives.
- datavirtue 2y ago
  You can build five F-18s for the price of one F-35.
  - nradov 2y ago
    Wrong. The current unit cost for an F-35B is about $109M while an F/A-18E/F is about $55M. That's a difference of 2×, not 5×. And more importantly, the F/A-18 can't operate from amphibious ships to support Marine Corps ground forces. If it can't accomplish the required mission then the cost is moot. https://breakingdefense.com/2023/10/newest-f-35-f-15ex-contracts-are-set-but-how-much-do-they-cost-exclusive/ https://breakingdefense.com/2023/10/newest-f-35-f-15ex-contr... It's disappointing to see people post lazy, low-effort comments like this without bothering to do even basic fact checking.
- gm3dmo 2y ago
  > and it's impossible to keep extending their service lives. B52 projected to last till 2050
  - aceofspades19 2y ago
    B-52s aren't subject to the same stress as fighter aircraft are, that's why they are able to keep flying for so long (among other reasons).