Slash Boxes

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Monday June 02 2014, @11:36AM   Printer-friendly
from the buddy-can-you-spare-me-a-dime? dept.

The US military's F-35 Joint Strike Fighter aircraft is proving to be a pain in the neck in more ways than one. Not only did the Pentagon spend almost $400 billion to buy 2,400 aircraft - about twice as much as it cost to put a man on the moon - the F-35 program is 7 years behind schedule and $163 billion over budget. This at a time when cuts in the defense budget are forcing the Pentagon to shrink the size of the military. CBS 60 Minutes took a closer look at the troubled fighter plane a few months back, but their rebroadcast on Sunday evening seems like as good a reason as any to revisit one of the biggest ongoing budget debacles in U.S. military memory. David Martin gets an inside look at what makes the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter the most expensive weapons system in history.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Angry Jesus on Monday June 02 2014, @03:32PM

    by Angry Jesus (182) on Monday June 02 2014, @03:32PM (#50257)

    > Can the F-35 land on a carrier?

    Yes []

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by frojack on Monday June 02 2014, @04:30PM

    by frojack (1554) Subscriber Badge on Monday June 02 2014, @04:30PM (#50276) Journal

    In fact, this is one of the problems with the F35 design.

    Instead of building a custom aircraft for the Air Force, and a different aircraft for the Navy, and yet a different aircraft for the dense European airspace, they tried to do it all in one airframe with slightly different bolt on gear.

    Lesson learned. A separate airplane for each theater is likely going to be cheaper. If you need a follow on for the F/A18, let bids for one, and let the bidders decide which airframe they want to offer. Don't require it also be flyable by the Air Force, salable to Australia or suitable for operation in Norway.

    No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.