SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Overall fleet-wide monthly availability rates remain around 50 percent, a condition that has existed with no significant improvement since October 2014, despite the increasing number of new aircraft. One notable trend is an increase in the percentage of the fleet that cannot fly while awaiting replacement parts – indicated by the Not Mission Capable due to Supply rate.
[...] Total acquisition costs for Lockheed Martin Corp.'s next-generation fighter may rise about 7 percent to $406.5 billion, according to figures in a document known as a Selected Acquisition Report. That's a reversal after several years of estimates that had declined to $379 billion recently from a previous high of $398.5 billion in early 2014.
FY17 DOD PROGRAMS: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)
Related: The F-35 Fighter Plane Is Even More of a Mess Than You Thought
The F-35: A Gold-Plated Turkey
Flawed and Potentially Deadly F-35 Fighters Won't be Ready Before 2019
Lockheed Martin Negotiating $37 Billion F-35 Deal
Does China's J-20 Rival Other Stealth Fighters?
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 29 2018, @04:52PM (5 children)
While I agree with you (and who wouldn't) that military spending can turn into a jobs program / corporate welfare,
it is not true that America's only enemies/agressive rivals are poor countries.
The USSR may not exist anymore, but Russia still does and it has invaded and annexed territory basically just yesterday. They and the Chinese have been using their military to harrass US forces on NEUTRAL territory.
Only the naive think a country doesn't need a robust military to fend off attackers/expansionists who take over allies' territory. The F-35 program in particular may be a bad joke, but military spending in general isn't. (Big projects are always tricky to keep on track.)
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Monday January 29 2018, @08:38PM (4 children)
I'm guessing you're referring to grab of Crimea from Ukraine. Which (a) doesn't threaten the US in any way, (b) they did to retain control of one of their major naval bases, and (c) occurred in the wake of a US-backed coup against their allied (and elected, I might add) government of Ukraine. The Russkies are not exactly the aggressors there.
As for the Chinese, I'm guessing you're talking about the jockeying around in the South China Sea. That also isn't a threat to the US in any way, although it's annoying (but not actually threatening right now) our allies in the Philippines and Taiwan.
As for military spending, we spend about 3.5 times what the Chinese spend, and about 8 times what the Russians spend. I'm not convinced we're seeing anything close to good value for our money.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @03:50AM
Don't forget Russia's stealing a piece of Georgia (South Ossetia) before that and the takeover of the eastern part of Ukraine.
US military planes and ships getting HARRASSED in international territory or inside allied territory is nothing other than a threat--a test, really, to see if we are cowards.
I suppose for you until they actually blow up one of our planes or ships they aren't a threat. It's too late at that point.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @04:04AM
You seem totally ignorant of the benefit of having safe shipping lanes and countries that don't have to worry about being invaded or having their territories with natural resources stolen.
The United States performs this vital world peace keeping service which is one reason they spend more than other countries that just free ride on the US's services.
Absent order, other countries would have to build up their militaries and more wars would break out. Police perform a critical service everyone (except crooks maybe) benefits from, and the US is the world's police. Better us than the Chinese.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @06:11AM
That is also ignoring the United States dominion over 80+ percent of the pacific in large part due to the Guano Act, combined with UNCLOS rules surrounding island sizes sufficient to recieve coastal waters and an EEZ.
The US complaining about Chinese influence over the Spratly Isles and other areas is really the pot calling the kettle black. Given China's size in comparison to the US, the US is grabbing far more sea resources than they deserve based on either population or territory size.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @06:16AM
If we spend 3.5 times what China does, they they are ahead. This is because everything they buy is made in China. Everything we buy is made in the USA, so it costs more. We ought to be spending 10 times as much.
We also throw in some expensive stuff that China probably doesn't, like Veterans Administration health care.