You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: Politix
WaPo Takes on the F-35
2013-03-10
The Defense Department and Lockheed Martin, the giant contractor hired to design and build the plane, also known as the Joint Strike Fighter, have constructed what amounts to a budgetary force field around the nearly $400 billion program.

Although it is the costliest weapons system in U.S. history and the single most expensive item in the 2013 Pentagon budget, it will face only a glancing blow from the sequester this year. And as the White House and Congress contemplate future budgets, those pushing for additional cuts may find it difficult to trim more than a fraction of the Pentagon's proposed fleet, even though the program is years behind schedule and 70 percent over its initial price tag.
The F-35 and the military industrial complex. A two-fer!
The reasons for the F-35's relative immunity are a stark illustration of why it is so difficult to cut the country's defense spending. Lockheed Martin has spread the work across 45 states -- critics call it "political engineering" -- which in turn has generated broad bipartisan support on Capitol Hill. Any reduction in the planned U.S. purchase risks antagonizing the eight other nations that have committed to buying the aircraft by increasing their per-plane costs. And senior military leaders warn that the stealthy, technologically sophisticated F-35 is essential to confront Iran, China and other potential adversaries that may employ advanced anti-aircraft defenses.

When the F-35 finishes testing, "there will be no yes-or-no, up-or-down decision point," said Pierre Sprey, who was a chief architect of the Air Force's F-16 Fighting Falcon. "That's totally deliberate. It was all in the name of ensuring it couldn't be canceled."
As opposed to the past, when several aircraft were developed at the same time, in a competition, But that became too expensive.
To the plane's backers, including senior leaders of the Air Force and Marine Corps, the benefit is worth the cost. Unlike the infantry, which still accepts battlefield casualties as part of war, military aviators have grown accustomed to a different risk calculus since the 1991 Persian Gulf War, when U.S. warplanes quickly established air superiority over Iraq with minimal losses: They want to ensure that, whatever the future conflict, their planes are packed with enough offensive and defensive measures to accomplish the mission and avoid getting shot down.

"This aircraft reinforces the way Americans go to war. . . .We don't want to win 51-49. We want to win 99 to nothing," said Lt. Gen. Frank Gornec, the assistant vice chief of staff of the Air Force. He said he is convinced the F-35 "will become a superstar in the arsenal of the United States."
Posted by:Bobby

#11   Lockheed Martin has spread the work across 45 states -- critics call it "political engineering"

That's what Rockwell did with the B-1 bomber. It is the only way to assure funding from Democratic politicians. Unfortunately the only way democrats will support a defence program is as pork. That they can understand. Patriotism, or concern for people who risk their lives to protect us, is completely beyond these people.
Posted by: Frozen Al   2013-03-10 20:23  

#10  #7 That's right, Raj, it's actually a three-fer: the Mil-Ind Complex, a new product, and much more money for 'more important' things - like social engineering.
Posted by: Bobby   2013-03-10 17:38  

#9  I'm only annoyed because they used Air Force and Marine Corp in the same sentence exclusive of infantry.

Every Marine an Aviator, no wait....
And trust me, at some point the Army (other infantry) is going to be wanting some of that sweet CAS that an F-35B will be able to provide.

Also not a good idea to leave the Royal Navy in the lurch, they can't fly F-18s, the catapult war is over for them. Cancel the F-35B and you also may as well cancel the Prince of Wales and QE.

Posted by: Shipman   2013-03-10 17:10  

#8  This project helps keep military aviation engineering and manufacturing capability available. Way overpriced and overpoliticized, but not entirely a bad thing. For example, the B-17 was created in 'peace' time, and only manufactured in any quantity after we entered the war, where it was a most important factor.
Posted by: Glenmore   2013-03-10 14:45  

#7  The Defense Department and Lockheed Martin, the giant contractor hired to design and build the plane, also known as the Joint Strike Fighter, have constructed what amounts to a budgetary force field around the nearly $400 billion program.

Funny how spending on the military tends to be the only type of spending that's objectionable to the press...
Posted by: Raj   2013-03-10 14:40  

#6  Air Force Magazine has a telling article in which the F-35 is severly criticized by the test pilots; no visibility to the rear, unreliable ejection seats, small control surfaces limit manuverability( sez that stealth=small) and the the fbled Lawn dart can fly rings around it. Time to kill this Edsel. Or upgrade with Lithium-ion batteries.
Posted by: USN,Ret.   2013-03-10 12:47  

#5  "We don't want to win 51-49. We want to win 99 to nothing," said Lt. Gen. Frank Gornec

What a bully! That's just mean. Except that winning 99-zip means you have more of your expensive stuff and valuable people left over at the end. And being able to win 99-zip might mean you don't have to fight in the first place.
Posted by: SteveS   2013-03-10 12:38  

#4  Of course they're going to talk about how Everything Else is better: it's reached LRIP.

Now all they have to do is _keep_ it in LRIP and voila! Disarmament!
Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain   2013-03-10 11:55  

#3  Lockheed Martin has spread the work across 45 states -- critics call it "political engineering" -- which in turn has generated broad bipartisan support on Capitol Hill.

Same "political engineering" technique appears to be working for Obamacare as well.
Posted by: Besoeker   2013-03-10 11:45  

#2  Ship, I was once told that should be 'ex-spurts', as a reminder of those that can't anymore.
Posted by: Skidmark   2013-03-10 11:12  

#1  To the plane's backers, including senior leaders of the Air Force and Marine Corps, the benefit is worth the cost. Unlike the infantry, which still accepts battlefield casualties as part of war, military aviators have grown accustomed to a different risk calculus

Yep.
EXPERTS
Posted by: Shipman   2013-03-10 10:53  

00:00