What is the afterburner on the F-35 Lightning II like?

  • Thread starter Thread starter motomax99
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the F-35 Lightning II program, highlighting a recent Government Accountability Office report that estimates the total cost of acquiring and operating a new fleet of jet fighters for the U.S. military could reach nearly $1 trillion. The report cites significant delays, manufacturing inefficiencies, and rising costs associated with the program. Participants express concerns about the long-term financial implications, noting that the costs are projected over four decades. The complexity of the F-35, designed to serve multiple branches of the military and fulfill various roles, is acknowledged as a contributing factor to its challenges. Despite criticisms regarding cost and performance, some participants recognize the aircraft's advanced capabilities, emphasizing the need to balance quality with budgetary constraints.
motomax99
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
look at the afterburner when it goes vtaf!
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6668433355004112446&ei=38uqSOcZipLjArvDvJUL&q=F35+lightning2&vt=lf&hl=en
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
motomax99 said:
look at the afterburner when it goes vtaf!
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6668433355004112446&ei=38uqSOcZipLjArvDvJUL&q=F35+lightning2&vt=lf&hl=en

freerepublic.info said:
The cost of buying and operating a new fleet of jet fighters for the U.S. military is nearing $1 trillion, according to a congressional audit that found the program dogged by delays, manufacturing inefficiencies and price increases.

Released Tuesday, the report from the Government Accountability Office offers a sobering assessment of the ambitious effort to deliver a modern series of aircraft known as the F-35 Lightning II to the Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps.
http://freerepublic.info/focus/f-news/1984480/posts

Not awesome. This cost is probably over four decades, but still not awesome.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Don't forget,you are paying for quality...Remember the US has never lost a F-22 in battle.
 
they've never lost a pogo stick with a bell on top in battle, either.
 
WhiteKnights said:
Don't forget,you are paying for quality...Remember the US has never lost a F-22 in battle.

...? Probably because an F-22 has never been in battle...

I really don't think you have any idea what you're talking about (sorry).
 
OAQfirst said:
http://freerepublic.info/focus/f-news/1984480/posts

Not awesome. This cost is probably over four decades, but still not awesome.

It's not surprising considering the absolutely Herculean requirements for that project. There has never been a program that was supposed to span all services and perform, essentially, all fighter and bomber roles. They want everything in one package and this is what they get. The bean counters want one single aircraft to reduce maintenance and operating costs. They're losing any gains in the up front costs for having to figure out the aviation version of the TOE.

BTW...it is still an incredible aircraft. Give credit where credit is due.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
FredGarvin said:
BTW...it is still an incredible aircraft. Give credit where credit is due.

I would if there was any credit left to give. :P
 

Similar threads

Replies
80
Views
13K
Replies
3
Views
7K
Replies
11
Views
4K
Replies
23
Views
4K
Replies
21
Views
4K
Replies
14
Views
5K
Back
Top