spike7451 Posted May 18, 2014 Share Posted May 18, 2014 Not good news for us if it is,but I've always maintained it's a white elephant & we'd have been better off buying an existing platform & upgrading that. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/10838453/RAFs-70-million-F-35-fighter-may-be-cancelled-because-of-poor-performance.html Britain's long-delayed £70 million stealth fighter may have to be cancelled because of its poor performance, according to analysis by a senior US Air Force officer. The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter being built for British and US forces is based on outdated ideas of air warfare, it is claimed. The aircraft could be unable to evade enemy radar and be too expensive for long campaigns. The critique in the US Air Force’s own journal concludes that the new fighter may even have “substantially less performance” than some existing aircraft. Britain is preparing to buy at least 48 of the Lockheed Martin aircraft to replace its scrapped Harrier jump jets; the US military is expected to order more than 2,400. The £235 billion programme is the most expensive weapons system in history at a time when defence budgets on both sides of the Atlantic are being cut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnT Posted May 18, 2014 Share Posted May 18, 2014 Perhaps the most worthwhile and insightful quote in the main article is:- "Its very difficult to peel back whats being said because lots of people have an axe to grind, he said." I am finding the argument difficult given that both sides seem to lose objectivity and are not about to let facts get in the way of a good prejudice. Is it going to be a good plane or not? Seems no one can say for sure. Maybes aye maybes no then Reverse engineer TSR2 from Cosford anyone? Can't be too difficult to stick a hook on it ! Anyone in the market for two very large container ships? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger331 Posted May 18, 2014 Share Posted May 18, 2014 I must admit to having some concerns about the validity of the Aircraft Carriers when one considers how much of the UK defense budget will be tied up with these assets before and after they enter service. That said, I believe the pro's outweigh the con's but I still have grave doubts about the F-35 and its purported capabilities. What I simply cannot understand is why, when we have entered into a Strategic Defence partnership with the French, which includes co-developing and building the new aircraft carriers, we are not buying an excellent, combat proven current generation fighter-bomber called the Rafale M. The French have absorbed the vast majority of the R&D costs so it makes eminent sense, particularly when you consider that one of the ideas of building and operating the new carrier is to provide for cross-decking. Of course, what I have not taken into account would be the desire of our wonderful procurement system to insist that a UK variant of the Rafale M would require new engines, avionics, weapons etc in order to 'enhance' it and make it heavier, slower and less capable than its 'pure' French stablemate….sound familiar to anyone ?? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bentwaters81tfw Posted May 18, 2014 Share Posted May 18, 2014 I refer my learned Gentlemen to a prediction I made some time ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kallisti Posted May 18, 2014 Share Posted May 18, 2014 (edited) Well there is the enormous extra cost to equip the carriers with cats and traps (even though the carriers were SUPPOSED to have been designed with this in mind). Since the carriers are not nuke or steam powered, where do they get steam from to power the cats? Need to fit a boiler... The electromagnetic cat is still in development as well... What pi... annoys me most is the assumption that from the carrier deck the only aircraft we need to launch will be the fighters. What about AWACS, support & supplies aircraft, other countries aircraft? As you said, these are supposed to be cross-deck capable, but if we go with VSTOL aircraft nobody else can use our carriers! The whole exercise is a colossal waste of money to creates something that will be useless and worse than that, cripple our armed forces budgets for decades to come! The politicians who agreed to this mess (Brown, Blair, Cameron et all) should be keelhauled! Edited May 18, 2014 by Kallisti 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen Posted May 18, 2014 Share Posted May 18, 2014 F-35 Too Big To Fail Stephen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hacker Posted May 18, 2014 Share Posted May 18, 2014 I believe when it comes to stuff like this whether military or not there is one word the explains why things go wrong.........GOVERNMENT! Once the politicians get involved things go wrong just about 90% of the time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomjw Posted May 18, 2014 Share Posted May 18, 2014 This won't get cancelled. Too much at stake, reputation wise. Reputation, both with the Americans and with the current government who curtailed the Harrier service life and changed the spec on the carrier based F-35. What is more likely to happen is that there will be penalties for LM if the performance specs are not reached (the aircraft is still too heavy). The penalties are likely be financial, in the form of LD's (Liquidated Damages). No-one in this, or any future government will cancel the contract. Each of the main parties are involved somewhere along the line. Cheers, Tom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shar2 Posted May 18, 2014 Share Posted May 18, 2014 Already too much of a political hot potato. Locked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts