
Head of US military testing slams F-35, says it's unfit to fly - CPAhem
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/04/03/gilmore_farewells_trump_government_slamming_the_f35_again/
======
raspasov
The F-35 is one of those programs that completely boggles the mind. It's
government abomination at its worst. Let's put a few numbers in perspective:
SpaceX operated for 10 years with approx. $1 billion USD total. It designed
space craft that flew to space. The budget for F-35 is exceeding $400 billion
and it's not even close to completion. This is 400x more! And when I say
"budget", if you live in the US currently, "budget" means "comes from your
pocket". I don't have a better word for this than flat-out INSANITY.

~~~
atonse
Eh it's a lot more complicated than just "gov bad private good"

The goals of the F35 were to be the fighter for all the branches of the
military. The problem is that they all have very different requirements.

Marry that with a tech-fixes-everything attitude and you have a Frankenstein
of an aircraft with so much "technology" that it gets in the way of the human
pilot's instincts.

And lastly, the project has been strategically split up by contractors in a
way that it creates jobs in so many congressional districts, so congress
members are loathe to shut down a program that brings jobs in their district.

All this is done by PRIVATE sector contractors.

~~~
raspasov
Yea, of course private sector will rationally benefit when government is
running around like a chicken without a head throwing money around. I don't
want to get into the reasons why the incentives are setup like they are -
that's a very broad discussion. I agree (without being a fighter jet expert)
that F-35 seems like a terrible idea of near-infinite complexity that no
amount of money will make right.

~~~
dafash
Near infinite complexity has no meaning as a descriptor of complexity.
Infinity isn't something you can describe approaching without convergence.

~~~
raspasov
It was a figure of speech :) Here's a great paper about the topic of
complexity
[http://shaffner.us/cs/papers/tarpit.pdf](http://shaffner.us/cs/papers/tarpit.pdf)
if you feel like digging deeper.

------
grizzles
The entire way the U.S. military does procurement is wrong. It's based on
politics, not merit. If there was one area of government Silicon Valley should
disrupt it's this. Boeing / Lockheed / etc have no special insight that should
make them a preferred no-bid contractor. They just hire engineers like
everyone else. Procurement for any new tech should be outsourced based on a
type of hybrid elimination / round robin tournament between companies. If a
company develops some standout tech on their own, but falls short in other
areas, then they should make a law that other companies in the tournament
should be able to license that tech.

------
jamesgaston
What do you expect for $400b?

------
bordercases
Has research into F-35 tech produced any externalities in the civilian sector?
At this rate I'm thinking of calling the project "basic research" and call it
a day.

------
Neliquat
Are we just posting anti f35 stuff now? It seems a bit tired and forced at
this point, no matter your opinion. To me, it just seems like recursive
subcontractor issues.

------
banku_brougham
Combine the profit motive, a price insensitive customer, and effectively
limitless resources. There are no constraints to this optimization scenario.

------
specializeded
*retired

~~~
llcoolv
an advanced sophist will explain to you how president and head are lifelong
titles and it is technically correct enough. right before plunging into an
hour-long bitching session over the post-truth politics and (just a bit)
fake(r than theirs) news.

