Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

>> I don't know in the end if we would have just been better off with three purpose-built aircraft.

We've tried this in the past and failed to control costs spectacularly. The JSF/F-35 project is an insane boondoggle but it seems unlikely that the alternative of splitting them out would have been better.

We all know what should have been done by this point, which is... not the JSF. But we're pretty far down this road and we do need to modernize the current air superiority weapons we have, so... eh. It looks like we're stuck.




> We've tried this in the past and failed to control costs spectacularly. The JSF/F-35 project is an insane boondoggle but it seems unlikely that the alternative of splitting them out would have been better.

If it had been split out into three separate programs, we'd probably have two aircraft that were "good enough" and one that was behind schedule or deficient in some way.

I'll take that over one "no, really, we have just one more round of changes to make, and then it'll be ready to satisfy everyone" fighter.


The 35 costs more than the existing different aircraft, while performing worse in many scenarios. We do not need to "modernize" anything if that means reducing capability while increasing cost. Technology doesn't matter if it doesn't serve a purpose.


Which modern aircraft does it cost more than? Lot 12 has has an agreed upon price tag of $81 million per F-35A, and lot 14 has been estimated to reach $76 million. Source: https://www.defensenews.com/air/2019/06/10/lockheed-pentagon...


>> Which modern aircraft does it cost more than?

Wikipedia indicates the A10 runs about $12M. Maybe it's actually more, but there is alot of room between 12 and 81. The article also indicates that the F-35 needs upgrades as soon as it's purchased, so they are playing games to lower the quoted price.

You did ask about "modern aircraft" which the A10 is not, but that's my point. "Modern" or "Advanced Technology" is not relevant - the troops and pilots are saying the F-35 can not perform the mission of the A10 as well as the A10, so it seems to be a case of "modern advanced technology" is actually an expensive step in the wrong direction.


>"Modern" or "Advanced Technology" is not relevant

The A10 is completely ineffective against any enemy with modern air defenses or any enemy with serious ongoing support from such a country.

The A10 helped against Iraq, Afghanistan and ISIS (if it was used against ISIS) only because no such country had any serious commitment to the survival of those regimes.

Moreover, the A10 cannot be upgraded to be effective against modern air defenses without basically designing and developing an entirely new warplane. It would for example need new engines capable of generating vastly more electricity than the current engines can.

I'm glad that the Air Force of my country is not spending a lot of money or time and attention planning wars against opponents that will quickly lose any ability to shoot down its planes. Even if those are the majority of wars it will fight in the future, what really matters is the next war that is not like that.


Compare that article to this one, specifically the editor's note at the bottom: http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/release/3/203...


Agreed. As much as I thought it looked like a pregnant fish from the side, I wonder if Boeing's design would have been better later in the development lifecycle.


Based on what out of curiosity?


The X-32 used a direct-lift thrust vectoring system for its STOVL variant, while the X-35 used a lift fan. Late design change ramifications and logistic footprints for the two options would have been different.


> We all know what should have been done by this point, which is... not the JSF.

What, specifically?


And making more F22 wasn't an option?


The F22 has no variant for carrier (folded wings) or amphibious assault (SVTOL) ships.


There were proposals for a carrier based F-22 derivative, though.




Registration is open for Startup School 2019. Classes start July 22nd.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: